Loss of Privacy

A few months ago, the TSA agreed to test their full body scanners after anomalies appeared and public outcry raised concerns over the safety of the machines. Their new test results claim that the machines are safe and people shouldn’t worry about going through them.

“The latest reports confirm previous testing and show that every backscatter unit currently used for passenger screening in U.S. airports is operating well within applicable national safety standards,” said TSA spokesman Nicholas Kimball.

Test results released by TSA in March showed some anomalies, such as missing data or calculation errors unrelated to safety. The agency ordered new tests for the scanners as well as other X-ray equipment used to screen baggage that had problematic reports.

The machines cannot produce more than 0.005 millirem per scan, according to TSA. In comparison, a chest X-ray will expose someone to 10 millirem of radiation and the maximum recommended exposure to radiation from man-made sources is 100 millirem per year, according to TSA.

Any amount of x-rays is unsafe. To force people, illegally, to go through the scanners increases their health risk. The scanners are also an outright violation of the 4th amendment.

Regardless of any outcome of these tests, the fact remains that the TSA is doing tests on their own machines. There are no independent studies of the machines as of yet, so it is difficult to believe these results haven’t been skewed in some manner. The TSA cannot count their so-called independent studies because they were given a test machine that was cobbled together. It was given a set of parameters and then tested in those parameters. No independent study has ever been given a machine that is in use in the field, thus those studies are not valid.

Given the fact that the European Parliament voted last week 37-2 on strict measures for the full body scanners, including the right to opt out of them on health concerns, just how safe are these machines?

Worried about the impact on health and privacy, the committee said X-ray scanners “using ionising radiation should be prohibited in the EU” and that no body images should be produced.

The committee added that images “must be destroyed right after the person has passed through the security control and may not be stored.”
A final vote will be taken in June. Let’s hope the vote holds up and at least Europeans and travelers to Europe will be able to avoid these invasive and illegal machines.

As for the US, there should be a choice of full body scanner, metal detector, or regular pat down (not the groping you currently get). Passengers shouldn’t have to beg for an opt out and they shouldn’t be humiliated with invasive pat downs as retaliation for their personal concern and safety.

EPISODE 1

Full Version Wake Up Call Episode 1 – No Decision About Me Without Me – Full Version from Health Emergency on Vimeo.

Dr John Lister blows away the slick marketing of the government’s plans for the NHS. His witty speech reveals their true intent – to fragment and privatise the health service.

Peppered with jokes and cartoons from the likes of Steve Bell, the film is an easily understood and amusing explanation of how the NHS, as we now know it, will be demolished, if these plans succeed.

John Lister shows us why the plans, at urgent risk of slipping through in a fog of jargon and promotional spin, will be disastrous for NHS patients and staff.

If you care about your health service and want to know what is in store for it, then watch this video and pass the link on to friends, family and colleagues NOW!

Produced for Keep Our NHS Public www.keepournhspublic.com and for Health Emergency www.healthemergency.org.uk

EPISODE 2

Wake Up Call Episode 2 “A Betrayal of Trust” from Health Emergency on Vimeo.

A film by Anne-Marie Sweeney produced for Keep Our NHS Public and Health Emergency

Sugar Coating the Bitter Bill.

Louise Irvine is a GP in the deprived area of New Cross. She shows how trusted GPs are being used to sugar coat the denationalisation of the NHS, proposed in the government’s Health and Social Care Bill.

Dr Irvine explains with care and compassion, how this bitterly unacceptable bill will harm patient care and break up ‘the NHS family’.

Simply and without jargon, she makes clear why local GPs will actually have less control over their patients’ treatment if it is not scrapped.

Dr Irvine reveals the serious implications that this will have on patient trust.

If you want to know just why so many people in the NHS are in opposition to Lansley’s Bill, then take 15 minutes to watch this video. Find out why the bill will be hugely costly to the NHS budget and will seriously damage our health.

From Project Gulf Impact:

Several volatile hydrocarbons found in crude oil were detected in the blood of several residents from the Orange Beach, AL area. Among the hydrocarbons tested, several were detected at abnormally high levels including ethylbenzene, xylene, hexane. These individuals were not directly involved in BP’s clean-up operations, nor had they been exposed to any industrial environment where the presence of these compounds would be of concern. Therefore, it can be assumed that residents living near the Gulf of Mexico shoreline are at risk of exposure to aerosolized VOC’s moving inland from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

The blood test performed on these individuals is called the Volatile Solvents Profile (Metametrix.com). The test can be obtained and administered by any physician with the ability to perform a simple blood draw. The test will be shipped to a laboratory for analysis and returned to your doctor for interpretation and treatment.

The Gulf of Mexico is facing a significant threat to human health, which needs to be documented in a stringent and concrete manner. A multitude of symptoms have been reported ranging from subtle to severe; these include skin rashes and infections, upper respiratory burning, congestion and cough, headaches, nausea, vomiting, and neurological symptoms such as short-term loss of memory and coordination.

Please report symptoms to the Project Gulf Impact health line: (504) 814-0283

Project Gulf Impact is currently raising funds to provide further testing to residents who cannot afford the associated costs. To provide assistance please donate at ProjectGulfImpact.org/donate. To send information or inquire on this effort please email ProjectGulfImpact@gmail.com.

Gavin Garrison, Matt Smith, and Heather Rally for Project Gulf Impact.

Last May, the University of California at Berkeley asked incoming freshmen to voluntarily submit blood samples for DNA testing. The university said it was to help determine which genes controlled the body’s responses to alcohol, dairy products and folic acid. The change in the policy isn’t that they won’t be requesting the samples, but that no one will receive individual results. Because the university must comply with regulations, they will only reveal the collective results of all students who give samples.

In response to a state Public Health Department ruling on how DNA samples should be handled, UC Berkeley scientists reluctantly abandoned the idea to have freshmen and transfer students individually and confidentially learn about three of their own genetic traits. Instead, only collective results for all the 1,000 or so participants will be available and discussed at the orientation seminars next month.

Mark Schlissel, UC Berkeley’s dean of biological sciences and an architect of the DNA program, said he disagreed with the state Department of Public Health’s ruling that the genetic testing required advance approval from physicians and should be done only by specially-licensed clinical labs, not by university technicians. The campus could not find labs willing to do the work and probably could not afford it anyway, Schlissel said. He also contended that the project deserved an exemption from those rules because it was an educational exercise.

The university offered to test the gene variations that affect people’s reactions to three substances: alcohol, lactose and folic acid. Students were asked to provide the school with a swab of cells from inside the mouth.

Berkeley officials contend that the test results would not be medically significant. But the program was controversial with privacy advocates and ethicists complaining that it presented an unprecedented and disturbing use of genetic data by a university.

Many students had felt that they were coerced into giving a saliva sample and that the program was not really voluntary. Berkeley has promised that they will destroy the samples once the tests are completed, however some questions still linger. Many are still unsure exactly how the samples will be used. They will have the data. Creating a new test would be easy. If students give up their DNA, they probably also give up how it’s used once it is turned over to the university.

I have reported in the past that the HPV vaccine seemed wholly unnecessary, especially given the face that there was little evidence that the vaccine worked and it was rushed through testing. Now, a new report claims that not only is it unnecessary, it might even cause the cancer it’s meant to prevent.

The FDA report and the petition [pdf] for reclassification of the HPV vaccine reveals some interesting facts, including the fact that HPV might actually increase the risk of precancerous lesions by 44.6%, HPV is not the cause of cervical cancer, and that HPV is mostly self-limiting and causes no real danger to women.

The FDA news release of March 31, 2003 acknowledges that “most infections (by HPV) are short-lived and not associated with cervical cancer”, in recognition of the advances in medical science and technology since 1988. In other words, since 2003 the scientific staff of the FDA no longer considers HPV infection to be a high-risk disease when writing educational materials for the general public whereas the regulatory arm of the agency is still bound by the old classification scheme that had placed HPV test as a test to stratify risk for cervical cancer in regulating the industry.

This proves that the FDA knew, at least as far back as 2003, that HPV did not cause cervical cancer, yet they marketed the vaccine as such.

It is difficult to take an honest look at this scientific evidence and the statements made by the FDA and not come to the conclusion that mandatory Gardasil vaccination policies being pushed across U.S. states right now are based on something other than science.

The prevailing theories are financial gains for pharmaceutical companies and those that support them, a conspiracy to poison people, getting people used to submitting to whatever the government tells them is for the greater good. While the two conspiracy ideas could be plausible, I tend to lead towards greed as it’s usually the true reason people do these sorts of things.

NaturalNews does a great job of detailing all the dirty deeds that have gone on behind the scenes, including the fact that the Gardisil vaccine can cause precancerous lesions and it does more harm than good. Their report, at 9 pages, is long, but it’s well worth the read, especially if you have young women in your family who might be forced to take this vaccine.