Category Archives: health

H1N1 : Bailing Out Drug Companies

By Daniel Downs

Writing in the Epoch Times, Ronald Whitmont (M.D) quotes Center of Disease Control statistics showing the current level of deaths related to H1N1 and flu viruses are lower that the previous year.

Here’s what he wrote:

“In the 2007–2008 flu season, the CDC reported that the peak death rate (for pneumonia and influenza) was 9.1 percent. The highest death rate since the novel H1N1 pandemic began in early 2009 has only been 6.0 percent.”

If I’m not mistaken, flu shots for H1N1 were not available at the time of the CDC report, which was September 12, 2009.

Just last week, the mainstream media reported an epidemic number of H1N1 related deaths: 19 in just one week. Fox News reported 1,000 deaths.

Fox News sensational reporting failed to mention the time span during which those 1,000 deaths occurred. Was it 5 years, 10 years, 20 years, or more? It may have been for the past century. Even if the figure represents the number of deaths since the H1N1 outbreak (April 2009), the number of all influenza related deaths is still less than last season.

What Fox News number of death actually represents is anyone’s guess. One question that can be answered is whether the latest CDC statistics shows as drastic an increase in H1N1 deaths as hyped by the media.

The latest CDC report on influenza is for the week ending on October 24. The peak death rate for influenza and pneumonia related deaths was 7 percent. That is a 1 percent increase since the week ending on September 12 and 2 percent less than last season.

According to Whitmont, H1N1 is not only a milder and less lethal form of the flu but also is not transmitted from person to person as easily as other types of influenza. Therefore, most people who contract H1N1 will recover without needing medical attention. Those at risk are people with preconditions like asthma or diabetes.

“Ninety percent of those who suffered complications from H1N1 since early 2009 also had either asthma or a seizure disorder. Those with preexisting or underlying medical conditions (asthma, seizure disorder, diabetes, heart disease, and pregnancy) are at increased risk of suffering complications, which is typical for influenza.”

If H1N1 is a health-risk to those with other medical illnesses, why then are the government and media pushing the H1N1 vaccine as some sort of life-saving miracle drug?

I can think of only one reason: To bailout drug companies.

Since the government’s bailout-drug-companies sales campaign, the fake epidemic has been less deadly than the typical flu season of 2007-2008. It is interesting that the government and their corporate media partners are using a capitalistic approach to bailing out the drug companies.

We are all government-for profit guinea pigs now!

The Constitution, Federal Legislation, and Ohio

By Matt Meyer

“First do no harm” should hang above the halls of Congress. Unfortunately, those four simple words aren’t a consideration in our nation’s capital. How else could you explain the budget-busting global warming and national health care bills currently dominating the public debate? Separately, each measure is fiscally irresponsible. Taken together, the bills will devastate Ohio’s weak economy and place enormous unfunded mandates on the state’s Swiss cheese budget.

First, there is the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill. With Ohio’s natural abundance of coal, almost 90% of Ohio’s energy is produced by CO2 producing coal-fired power plants. Those power plants feed electricity to what is left of Ohio’s manufacturing plants, which produce still more CO2 emissions. All of that production translates into jobs. On the renewable energy side of the fence, Ohio isn’t blessed with an abundance of sunshine, consistent wind, or powerful rivers to power solar panels, wind turbines, or hydro plants. Although Ohio currently has two nuclear power plants, there appears to be no political will to build additional nuclear power plants.

Given these irrefutable facts, it is hard to imagine a scenario in which Ohioans don’t suffer increased costs, job losses, and economic decline should the cap and trade bill pass. Unlike the future made-in-Hollywood catastrophes portrayed by the global warming crowd, those costs, losses, and decline will be immediate and real for Ohioans.

On health care, Medicaid spending already consumes 39% of the state budget. The Baucus national health care bill would restrict Ohio from setting eligibility requirements, which would increase the load on states by $37 billion according to the Congressional Budget Office. Because Ohio is the seventh largest state and possesses an anemic economy, a big slice of that $37 billion will fall on Ohio taxpayers.

With these enormous economic stakes, Ohio’s two senators must put aside partisan urges, resist trendy but illogical policy options, and work toward solutions that are in the state’s best interests. To do otherwise is not only bad for Ohioans, but would actually go against the Founders’ original intent for the Senate when it was first established in the Constitution.

For America’s first 126 years, U.S. senators were elected by state legislatures. The reason rests in the Founders use of checks and balances to keep the political system in harmony. With U.S. representatives elected by popular vote in apportioned districts based on each state’s share of the total U.S. population, the House served as the place where the “will of the people” ruled. In theory, if a handful of large states with a majority of representatives banded together, they could pass legislation harmful to the other states.

In the Senate, however, to check the tyranny of the majority, the Founders allocated each state only two senators, thereby structurally blocking large states from riding roughshod over the smaller states as could happen in the House. To further check the accumulation of power in the federal government, the Founders placed the election of senators in the hands of state legislatures who would ensure that those individuals elected to the Senate would protect the interests of the states regardless of what the passions of the people wanted. For example, a majority of people in a state may want a federal program that individually costs them very little in taxes, but would place large unfunded costs on the state.

In 1913, the passage of the 17th Amendment altered this finely tuned structure by placing the election of senators in the hands of the people. Not surprisingly, shortly after this structural change to the Constitution, the era of big government in Washington, D.C. unchecked by the states began its march. Congress went from the New Deal to the Great Society to the era of unfunded mandates to today when Washington simultaneously considers bills that would nationalize 17% of the U.S. economy, and imposes additional burdens on our energy production just months after exploding the federal deficit, nationalizing car companies and banks, and passing the largest single year budget in American history.

So, how could Ohio’s senators or senate candidates support legislation like the Waxman-Markey or Baucus bills? When they no longer have to be accountable to the state they represent because it has no power to check their votes (i.e., a legislative threat not to reelect them should they vote yea), they can place other special interests and even their own ideological views ahead of what is best for Ohio, its economy, and its citizens.

The irony, of course, is that these “reforms” will hit Ohioans regressively so that the very middle class workers and poor that they claim to fight for will be hit the hardest.

Source: Buckeye Institute Weekly News Digest, October 12, 2009.

The Truth About the Flu Shot

By Sherri Tenpenny, DO

What’s in the regular flu shot?

 
  • Egg proteins: including avian contaminant viruses
  • Gelatin: can cause allergic reactions and anaphylaxis are usually associated with sensitivity to egg or gelatin
  • Polysorbate 80 (Tween80™): can cause severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis. Also associated with inferility in female mice.
  • Formaldehyde: known carcinogen
  • Triton X100: a strong detergent
  • Sucrose: table sugar
  • Resin: known to cause allergic reactions
  • Gentamycin: an antibiotic
  • Thimerosal: mercury is still in multidose flu shot vials

Do flu shots work?

Not in babies: In a review of more than 51 studies involving more than 294,000 children it was found there was “no evidence that injecting children 6-24 months of age with a flu shot was any more effective than placebo. In children over 2 yrs, it was only effective 33% of the time in preventing the flu.

Reference: “Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children.” The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2 (2008).

Not in children with asthma: A study 800 children with asthma, where one half were vaccinated and the other half did not receive the influenza vaccine. The two groups were compared with respect to clinic visits, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospitalizations for asthma. CONCLUSION: This study failed to provide evidence that the influenza vaccine prevents pediatric asthma exacerbations.

Reference: “Effectiveness of influenza vaccine for the prevention of asthma exacerbations.” Christly, C. et al. Arch Dis Child. 2004 Aug;89(8):734-5.

Not in children with asthma (2): “The inactivated flu vaccine, Flumist, does not prevent influenza-related hospitalizations in children, especially the ones with asthma…In fact, children who get the flu vaccine are more at risk for hospitalization than children who do not get the vaccine.”

Reference: The American Thoracic Society’s 105th International Conference, May 15-20, 2009, San Diego.

Not in adults: In a review of 48 reports including more than 66,000 adults, “Vaccination of healthy adults only reduced risk of influenza by 6% and reduced the number of missed work days by less than one day (0.16) days. It did not change the number of people needing to go to hospital or take time off work.”

Reference: “Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults.” The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 1 (2006).

Not in the Elderly: In a review of 64 studies in 98 flu seasons, For elderly living in nursing homes, flu shots were non-significant for preventing the flu. For elderly living in the community, vaccines were not (significantly) effective against influenza, ILI or pneumonia.

Reference: “Vaccines for preventing influenza in the elderly.” The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.3 (2006).

What about the new Swine Flu shot?

Some of the new H1N1 (swine flu) vaccines are going to be made by Novartis. These shots will probably be made in PER.C6 cells (human retina cells) and contain MF59, a potentially debilitating adjuvant. MF-59 is an oil-based adjuvant primarily composed of squalene.

All rats injected with squalene (oil) adjuvants developed a disease that left them crippled, dragging their paralyzed hindquarters across their cages. Injected squalene can cause severe arthritis (3 on scale of 4) and severe immune responses, such as autoimmune arthritis and lupus.

Ref: (1): Kenney, RT. Edleman, R. “Survey of human-use adjuvants.” Expert Review of Vaccines. 2 (2003) p171.

Ref: (2): Matsumoto, Gary. Vaccine A: The Covert Government Experiment That’s Killing Our Soldiers and Why GI’s Are Only the First Victims of this Vaccine. New York: Basic Books. p54.

Federal health officials are starting to recommend that most Americans get three flu shots this fall: one regular flu shot and two doses of the vaccine made against the new swine flu strain. School children who have never had a flu shot are targeted for four shots in the fall – twice for seasonal flu, twice for pandemic swine flu. (July 15, 2009 news)

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has been talking to school superintendents around the country, urging them to make plans to use buildings for mass vaccinations and for vaccinating kids first. (CBS News, June 12, 2009.)

Is Mandatory Vaccination Possible?

1946: US Public Health Service was established and Executive Order (EO) 9708 was signed, listing the communicable diseases where quarantines could be used. 1946 and 2003, cholera, diphtheria, TB, typhoid, smallpox, yellow fever, & viral hemorrhagic fevers were added.

April 4, 2003: EO 13295 added SARS to the list.

April 1, 2005: EO 13295 added “Influenza caused by novel or re-emergent influenza viruses that are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic.” EO 13295 also: The president gave the Sec. of HHS the power to quarantine, his or her discretion. Sec of HHS has the power to arrange for the “apprehension and examination of persons reasonably thought to be infected.” A cough or a fever could put a person at risk for being quarantined for an extended period of time without recourse.

January 28, 2003: Project BioShield was introduced during Bush’s State of the Union Address. This created permanent and indefinite funding authority to develop “medical countermeasures.”

The NIH was given authority to speed approval of drugs and vaccines. Emergency approval of a “fast tracked” drug and vaccine can be given without the regular course of safety testing.

December 17, 2006: Division E: The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREPA) was added as an addendum to Defense Appropriations Bill HR 2863 at 11:20p on Saturday night, long after House Committee members had signed off on the bill and gone home for the holidays.

Section (b)(1) states: The Sec of HHS can make a determination that a “disease, health condition or threat” constitutes a public health emergency. He or she may then recommend “the manufacture, testing, development, administration, or use of one or more covered counter measures…” A covered countermeasure defined as a “pandemic product, vaccine or drug.”

Division E also provides complete liability protection for all drugs, vaccines or biological products deemed a “covered countermeasure” and used for an outbreak of any kind. In July, 2009, complete liability protection was extened to drug companies that included any product used for any public health emergency declared by Sec of HHS.

Pharma is now protected from all accountability, unless “criminal intent to do harm” can be proven by the injured party. They are protected from liability even if they know the drug will be harmful.

“By 1853, Parliament began passing laws to make the untested vaccine compulsory throughout the British Empire. Other countries of Europe followed suit. Once the economic implications of compulsory vaccinations were realized, few dared to disagree. Then, as now, the media were controlled by the vaccine manufacturers and the government, who stood to make huge money from the sale of these spurious vaccines.”… Tim O’Shea, D.C.

For more info, visit Dr. Tenpenny’s website at www.drtenpenny.com

Who’s telling the truth about abortion funding in Health Care Reform Bill?

Cardinal Rigali says the bill does fund abortion and that those who say otherwise are pushing an “illusion.”

President Obama says the bill does not fund abortion and that those who say otherwise are guilty of a “fabrication.”

Who is right and who is wrong?

In a August 20 report, CNCNews compares statements made by and President Obama to answer the question.

Cardinal Rigal Cardinal Rigali laid out his position in a carefully reasoned and detailed argument presented in a pastoral letter sent to the U.S. House of Representatives on August 11. Here is his explanation:

“Because some federal funds are authorized and appropriated by this legislation without passing through the Labor/HHS appropriations bill, they are not covered by the Hyde amendment and other federal provisions that have long prevented federal funding of abortion and of health benefits packages that include abortion. The committee rejected an amendment to extend this longstanding policy to the use of federal subsidies for health care premiums under this Act. Instead the committee created a legal fiction, a paper separation between federal funding and abortion: Federal funds will subsidize the public plan, as well as private health plans that include abortion on demand; but anyone who purchases these plans is required to pay a premium out of his or her own pocket (specified in the Act to be at least $1.00 a month) to cover all abortions beyond those eligible for federal funds under the current Hyde amendment. Thus some will claim that federal taxpayer funds do not support abortion under the Act.

“But this is an illusion. Funds paid into these plans are fungible, and federal taxpayer funds will subsidize the operating budget and provider networks that expand access to abortions.”

President Obama not only disagrees with Cardinal Rigali’s conclusion that the bill funds abortion because it funds abortion providers, but in his short speech to a religious audience on BlogTalkRadio yesterday he said that those who say the bill funds abortion are not telling the truth.

Here is what President Obama said:

“I know there’s been a lot of misinformation in this debate. And there’s some folks out there who are, frankly, bearing false witness.”

“You’ve heard that this is all going to mean government funding of abortion. Not true. This is all–these are all fabrications that have been put out there in order to discourage people from meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation. And that is that we look out for one another. That I am my brother’s keeper and my sister’s keeper. And in the wealthiest nation on earth right now, we are neglecting to live up to that call.”

The committee referred to by Cardinal Rigali is the Energy and Commerce Committee. The Health Subcommittee amendment specifically states under 122 (4)(B): ABORTIONS FOR WHICH PUBLIC FUNDING IS ALLOWED.
Who’s telling the truth about abortion funding in Health Care Reform Bill?

“The services described in this subparagraph are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is permitted …”

Prior to the above, the amendment says that the public health insurance option “shall provide coverage for services described in paragraph (4)(B). Nothing in this Act shall be construed as preventing the public health insurance option from providing for or prohibiting coverage of services described in paragraph (4)(A). Sub-paragraph (4)(A) says what is not permitted in exactly the same words as in (4)(B).

So what is prohibited? Nothing. Under this amendment, the government can and will provide publicly funded abortion service coverage to all eligible citizens.

The CNSNews report further demonstrates how the New York Times spun the amendment in order to deceive the public. The NYT stated that the Health Care Reform Bill would subsidized health insurance premiums of low-income people, but would not cover abortion services.
Yet, as we saw in the above amendment, it would be covered.

According to CNSNews, low income Americans are not the only ones whose would receive federally subsidized health insurance.

“Under the terms of both the House and Senate bills, it is not only “low income people” who will qualify for federal subsidies to buy insurance, but also people making up to 400% of the poverty level ($88,000 for a family of four). The bill will guarantee all such federally subsidized insurance purchasers the ability to buy an insurance to plan that covers abortions. Therefore, federal money will pay for abortion coverage.”

“To put it more bluntly, this health care bill will take money away from hard-working, decent, pro-life taxpayers and hand it over to insurance providers that pay doctors to kill unborn babies.”

Who then is telling the truth about abortion funding under the Health Care Reform bill? Cardinal Rigali and those like him are telling America the truth. Obama and his religious supporters are not.

Suicide Prevention Drug Fraud: Study Finds 80 Percent of Suicide Victims On Antidepressant Drugs

By Mike Adams, Natural News Editor

A Swedish writer has accused the National Board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) of covering up evidence suggesting a connection between psychiatric drugs and suicide. Under a recent law, Swedish health-care providers must fill out reports on all suicides committed by patients under their care or within four weeks of a health care visit. The reports are then sent to the NBHW, which compiles and analyzes them.

Recently, the NBHW released the first report analyzing the 367 suicides recorded in 2006. “Not a single word is written about the most compelling fact: Well over 80 percent of persons killing themselves were treated with psychiatric drugs,” Janne Larson writes.

According to data received via a Freedom of Information Act request, more than 80 percent of the 367 suicides had been receiving psychiatric medications. More than half of these were receiving antidepressants, while more than 60 percent were receiving either antidepressants or antipsychotics. There is no mention of this either in the NBHW paper or in major Swedish media reports about the health care suicides.

Why the truth won’t be reported in the mainstream media

“It was contrary to the best interests of Big Pharma and biological psychiatrists” to expose the information, Larson writes. “It blew the myths of antidepressants and neuroleptics [antipsychotics] as suicide protecting drugs to pieces. It would also have hurt the career of many medical journalists to take up this subject; journalists who for years have made their living by writing marketing articles about new antidepressant drugs.”

These statements are quite true. The conspiracy of silence between Big Pharma and the mainstream media is now so strong that accurate news about the dangers of psychiatric drugs is rarely reported. As we recently saw in the death of Heath Ledger, the mainstream media is quick to blame the victim, but slow to realize that the real cause of these behavioral problems rests with the chemicals that alter brain function (and therefore alter behavior).

Evidence has emerged that a class of antidepressants known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) actually increases the risk of suicide in those who take them. While such claims have been hotly disputed by the pharmaceutical industry and many psychiatrists, experimental, epidemiological and case study evidence continues to emerge that reinforces such a link. The evidence suggests that those taking SSRIs are approximately twice as likely to commit suicide as those not taking such medications. This risk increase appears to be independent of the specific diagnosis or other underlying health factors.

Even worse, recent research published in the peer-reviewed journal PLoS Medicine (see http://medicine.plosjournals.org/pe…) reveals that antidepressant drugs don’t work any better than placebo at reducing depression. This study looked at all the clinical trials conducted on SSRIs, not just the ones selected by drug companies for publication. It reveals that SSRI drug manufacturers committed scientific fraud in censoring studies that did not show positive results. Now, the whole world knows that the disease mongering and hype behind antidepressant drugs was based on pure scientific fraud.

Source: Natural News.com, February 28, 2009

Total control of our lives

By Rense Johnson, Chairman of Citizens for Term Limits

The Obama Health plan isn’t just about health. It is a cover for grabbing total control of our lives.

I have heard that health care is estimated to comprise about a sixth of our economy.

HR 3200, the Obama plan, was reviewed by Liberty Council, a nationwide public interest religious civil liberties law firm.

Reading the bill (see our Links pagehttp://www.liberty.edu/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf) reveals a power grab by Obama and the government elitists attempting to gain TOTAL CONTROL over our lives.

Meaning personal, family, financial, banking, spying, abortion, speeding up end-of-life.

Rather than attempting to list the ways in which Obama would assert such total control (they are legion), I will state it in the negative: I defy anyone to find in HR 3200 one iota of freedom, one iota of daylight, for American people. There are none.

We should be grateful for the 52 so-called “blue dog” Democrats, the conservatives in the Democratic House of Representatives. It is a reflection of Democrat rot in the House that there aren’t twice that number willing to stand up for conservative values. Makes Republicans look better than they actually are, by a long shot.

The only answer? A term-limited congress, House and Senate, that will serve the people as the Founders intended and not their own selfish interests – including Obamacare and all its elitist supporters.

If Democrat’s Health Surtax Is 5.4 Percent, Taxpayers in Ohio would be among 39 States That Would Pay a Top Tax Rate Over 50%

By TF Staff

New taxes to fund the federal government’s plan for higher health insurance spending continue to be debated in Washington. According to a new Bloomberg report, the top surtax rate will be 5.4 percent in the House plan. That will be the top rate in a three-tiered surtax aimed at high-income tax returns:

1 percent surtax on AGI between $350,000 and $500,000 (singles between $280,000 and $400,000)

1.5 percent surtax on AGI between $500,000 and $1,000,000 (singles between $400,000 and $800,000)

5.4 percent surtax on AGI beyond $1,000,000 (singles beyond $800,000)

States have been raising taxes on this same group, leading to concern over how high the combined tax rates would be in each state, especially in the growing number of states with double-digit tax rates. Some commentators merely sum the rates at the federal, state and local level to give a statutory total tax rate. A more accurate method is to calculate the effective marginal tax rate, which takes into consideration deductions and adjustments. For a description of the difference between effective marginal tax rates and effective average tax rates, see Average vs. Marginal Tax Rates Revisited.

In Table 1 below we present calculations of the effective marginal tax rate on top earners. We use assume that the 2008 weighted local average for each state applies to 2011, the top federal taxable income rate will rise as scheduled to 39.6 percent, the top state tax rate in each state will follow current 2011 scheduled law, and a new House plan for 5.4 percent surtax on AGI earned at very high-income levels will become law.

Table 1 (Ohio)

Top Effective Marginal Rates under Proposed Health Care Surtax by State

Sorted by Combined Top Tax Rate in 2011

State

Avg. Local Rate

Top
State Rate (2011)

Top Federal Ordinary Rate

New
Surtax

Medicare
Tax

Combined
Top Rate

Rank

Ohio

1.82%

5.93%

39.6%

5.4%

2.9%

54.27%

13

To see rankings of other states, go to the Tax Foundation website.

Commentary

Taxing the rich to pay for free health care is an ploy of the rich and powerful to rob the non-rich of both their freedom and their income. Anyone familiar with Roman history will recognized the strategy. The Roman imperialists tax the nations of the world to pay for their big agendas. Caesar and the Roman Senate taxed the wealthy elites of the respective states. In turn, leaders like Herod increased local taxes on productive peasants. In order to pay, many had to borrow money. When misfortune rendered them unable to pay it back, their land was confiscated. Most were allowed to continue farming the same land as long as they gave Rome via Herod or some other member of the rich elite the required amount, usually over 50 percent.

What this means under the Democrats’ taxing scheme is this: we peasants will end up paying for the huge tax increases of the rich in inflationary costs for products and services. In fact, I recently listened to what Canadians and British people have experienced under universal health care. They have had to endure long waiting lists for care and large increases in overall cost for their health care.

In every respect, universal health care is much more costly than market based care. The highest price for socialist medicine is dying while waiting to receive the promised health care.

One woman with brain cancer was able to come to the Mayo Clinic in America to get the necessary cancer treatment. That is she is suing her government. Had she waited she certainly would have died.

Americans who love the right to life as well as true liberty does not need Democrats’ impoverishing programs or their deadly health care.

The FDA, Plan B, and Parental Rights

A U.S. District Court Judge in March made news by ordering the FDA to make Plan B, dubbed “the Morning After Pill”, available without a prescription to minors. Citing “political considerations, delays, and implausible justifications for decision-making” on the part of the FDA, the judge ordered that the age at which the drug is available over the counter be lowered from 18 to 17 years. In a decision not to appeal the ruling, the FDA issued the required authorization to Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. of Montvale, NJ, which markets the drug.

Several news stories at the time of the late-March ruling, and again when the FDA announced its authorization in late-April, addressed the debate over whether the pill promotes sexual promiscuity among teens, whether it amounts to early abortion, whether it protects a young woman’s reproductive rights, and so on.

What no one took into account, however, was the issue of parental rights. Prior to the ruling, the drug was available over the counter to women 18 and older, while those under 18 first had to first obtain a prescription. Although the court reversed this ruling based on data that the drug’s physical effects on 17-year-olds was no different than on adults, neither the judge nor the news reports seemed to consider the emotional vulnerability of minors, nor the role of parents in protecting them, when faced with so consequential a decision.

Even the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which we oppose for legal reasons, recognizes that persons under 18 should be accorded additional protections under the law. To make so controversial and significant a product available to minors without requiring medical or parental consent is a tremendous legal step that ought not to be ignored.

The decision over whether or not a minor should access such a drug is one which should include parents. We regret that the dialog regarding the FDA’s decision lacked this important consideration.

The proposed Parental Rights Amendment will uphold current state and federal laws which protect the right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children in medical and other health-related areas. The Amendment is not expected to impact this court ruling in any way, but will continue to protect the ability of parents to speak into such major decisions in the lives of their teenaged daughters.

–by ParentalRights.org, March 28, 2009

SOURCES:
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WellnessNews/Story?id=7404420
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/WireStory?id=7151963
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090423/ap_on_he_me/us_morning_after_pill

Win a Pack of Battery-Powered Yard Equipment

If you are willing to follow the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission’s Air Quality Advisory actions, you would be eligible to win one of three environmental-friendly B&D battery-power yard maintenance equipment packs:

 
* Combination Shrubbery Trimmer & Grass Shears,
* Hedge Trimmer; and
* Weed-whacker

The three lawn maintenance packs will be given to the winners one at the end of June, another at the end of July, and the last one at the end of August. The retail of the three tools is about $200.

What better way to avoid fines for high weeds, and for overgrown hedges and shrubs that hide the existence of your house. And while avoiding those fines, you will be helping to lower greenhouse gases and high ozone levels at ground levels in Xenia and across the Miami Valley.

If you are interested, go to the Miami Valley Air webiste. To register to win those prizes, call the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission at (937) 223-6323 and register now. You may also by-pass the contest and go straight to Environmental New Flash to sign up for the Air Quality Advisory e-mails, which you will receive once a day.

Swine Flu Virus Reaches Ohio Via Biological Attack?

The deadly swine flu virus hitched a ride in a 9 year old boy from Lorain, Ohio. The boy had returned from a trip to Mexico with his family. They had traveled all over Mexico including a visit to a farm.

The virus is new strain combined of strains from North America, Europe, and Asia. The unique combination has led some to speculate about the possible biological attach.

Contrary to some spectacular news reporting, the swine flu virus is not new to North America. There have been minor outbreaks of this type of flu since the early 1900s. It is contracted usually by contact with infected pigs or people. As in this case, it was probably spread by birds that inflected pigs that was passed on to humans. This is a more unusual outbreak because it is being widely spread from humans to humans. It is spread by sneezing, coughing, and the like. Therefore, it should be deemed unusual.

Nevertheless, the unanswered question raising speculation that terrorism may be a factor is why is it more severe and deadly in Mexico than in America? Another question not raised is why did it happen around the same time of President Obama’s visit to Mexico?