FDA Ethicists Undisclosed Conflicts Of Interest in Prenatal Dex Case

by Alice Dreger and Ellen K. Feder


[A 2014 article that details the questionable practices of modern medicine which both involves fraud and an overt application of eugenics rather than health care.  It is offered as a public service information source along with the caveat to beware of scientific studies which are usually wrong. . [Emphasis - DNI] - ED]

Newly available documents show conflicts of interest for the FDA ethicist who investigated a fetal drug experiment.  

Pediatric endocrinologist Maria New, now at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, is an internationally-recognized specialist in congenital adrenal hyperplasia, a genetic condition that can cause female fetuses to develop intersex (in-between male and female) genitals. For over a decade, Dr. New has encouraged pregnant women at risk of having a child with congenital adrenal hyperplasia to take the steroid dexamethasone starting as early as 3 weeks of pregnancy to try to prevent intersex development.

Dr. New has consistently described this extremely controversial off-label (i.e., not government-approved) use as safe and effective. In truth, there has never been a placebo-controlled trial of this use, and the only long-term prospective trial ever conducted resulted in so many “severe” adverse events that, in 2010, that study’s research team (a Swedish group) went to their ethics board to say they were halting the use altogether.

Dr. New’s aggressive “safe and effective” promotion of this fetal intervention—an intervention designed to cross the placenta and change fetal development—would be shocking enough. But we were shaken in late 2009 when we discovered that, even while she was direct-to-consumer advertising the intervention as having been “found safe for mother and child,” she was taking NIH grant money to study retrospectively whether it was safe and effective.

 In February of 2010, we along with thirty colleagues in bioethics and allied fields sent letters of concern to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) asking them to investigate the actions of Dr. New. At the FDA, the investigation was assigned to Robert “Skip” Nelson, a pediatric ethicist. Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information request suggest that Nelson proposed to OHRP that he handle the main part of the prenatal dexamethasone investigation for that agency as well. Ultimately the OHRP findings relied largely on a memo provided to them by Nelson as an FDA official.

While the federal investigation was ongoing, in May of 2010 the American Journal of Bioethics (AJOB) circulated a manuscript (in advance of publication, inviting open peer commentaries) attacking our letters of concern, saying they represented an instance of “unethical transgressive bioethics.”

At the time, we were not aware of conflicts of interest in the federal investigation or the AJOB article, because none were disclosed. Here is what we now know, including from material obtained just this week through the Freedom of Information Act:

First, neither the original AJOB manuscript (May 2010) nor the final published article (September 2010) included a conflict of interest statement from the authors. The lead author, Larry McCullough, failed to disclose that he held paid positions with the two medical schools implicated in the investigation (Mount Sinai and Cornell). The second author, Frank Chervenak, failed specifically to disclose that he was (and still is) Chair of Obstetrics and head of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine unit at the medical school where New “treated” over 600 pregnancies with prenatal dex.  Chervenak also failed to disclose that he served as “key personnel” on New’s NIH grant.

Responses to our Freedom of Information requests show that Larry McCullough gave the AJOB original manuscript to the federal investigators at OHRP prior to publication, in an attempt to undermine the claims in our complaints. No conflict of interest disclosures were attached to the manuscript. This suggests that OHRP personnel would have seen the McCullough and Chervenak criticisms of our request for an investigation, but would not have known of the authors’ conflicts of interest.

Second, it appears that Nelson did not disclose to his FDA or OHRP colleagues that he was a member of the editorial board of AJOB – the journal in which the criticisms were published. One might feel less concerned about this particular undisclosed conflict were it not for the fact that, like the AJOB target article, Nelson’s official FDA findings on prenatal dex misrepresented key facts, including whether the FDA had previously reviewed New’s use of this steroid on first-trimester fetuses.

Third, this week we have obtained additional material through our Freedom of Information request showing that Nelson was, in fact, developing an even deeper relationship with AJOB while he was conducting the prenatal dex investigation. At the very time Nelson was investigating our complaints, he was also negotiating to become editor-in-chief of a new AJOB journal, AJOB Primary Research (since renamed AJOB Empirical Bioethics).

A May 2010 email conversation between Nelson and others at the FDA shows that Nelson was to be compensated by AJOB not only with the editor-in-chief title, but also with $10,000 per year, for editorial assistance. In the email conversation about the new position with AJOB, Nelson never disclosed that the journal was being used to aggressively (dare we say “transgressively”?) undermine complaints he was investigating.

Curiously, Nelson’s FDA memo and the associated OHRP findings on prenatal dex were released on virtually the same day in September 2010 that AJOB published the McCullough and Chervenak “target article” and responses to it. The timing of this “coincidence” was openly celebrated by Glenn McGee, then editor-in-chief of AJOB: “With the release of the September issue of the Journal, both the FDA and OHRP have released letters responding to the complaints that are the subject of the Target Article…”

What might once have been thought fortuitous timing must now be examined through the lens of conflicts of interest, as we now know that, by September 2010, Nelson was working in titled and compensated positions for both the FDA and AJOB.

Fourth, in December 2010, AJOB published a “vindication” by Dr. New that consisted mostly of a long quote from Nelson’s FDA response to our letter. Consistent with the established pattern of non-disclosure, nowhere in conjunction with New’s “vindication” does one find disclosure of Nelson’s dual role as FDA investigator and key member of the AJOB editorial team.

We have repeatedly appealed to the editorial board of AJOB to add disclosures to all the dex-related publications. That has gotten us nowhere, except to force disclosure of who is on the AJOB conflict-of-interest committee. The committee includes Larry McCullough, specifically representing AJOB Empirical Bioethics, the journal given to Skip Nelson.






Alice Dreger and Ellen K. Feder 

Alice Dreger, PhD, is Professor of Clinical Medical Humanities and Bioethics at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. @alicedreger

Ellen K. Feder is Associate Professor of Philosophy and Religion at American University, and author of Making Sense of Intersex: Changing Ethical Perspectives in Biomedicine, just issued by Indiana University Press.


[Note:  Might wander through the typical profiles of the “bioethicists” identified in the following article: The article originally appeared here 

Larry McCullough, one of the founders of “bioethics”, pop control, research using children, pro-human embryonic stem cell research, etc.:  https://www.google.com/#q=%22Larry+McCullough%22+%22bioethics%22

Frank Chervenak, M.D., ObGyn specialist in maternal and fetal medicine, pro-abortion and woman’s rights, anti-personhood for the unborn, pro-euthanasia, etc.: https://www.google.com/#q=%22Frank+Chervenak%22+%22bioethics%22+%22controversy%22

Glenn McGee, partner with bioethics founder Art Caplan, pro-“designer babies” and human cloning, implicated in conflict of interest in the Celltex corruption case, etc.:  https://www.google.com/#q=%22Glenn+McGee%22+%22bioethics%22

Skip Nelson, Senior Pediatric Ethicist at FDA, promotes research using children, etc.:  https://www.google.com/#q=%22Skip+Nelson%22+%22bioethics%22&start=10

See also “Charges of editorial misconduct at American Journal of Bioethics (AJOB), at: 

http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2011/06/charges-of-editorial-misconduct-at-american-journal-of-bioethics/.

For an extensive analysis and critique of “bioethics”, with extensive references, see my article, "What is 'bioethics'?" (June 3, 2000), UFL Proceedings of the Conference 2000, in Joseph W. Koterski (ed.), Life and Learning X:  Proceedings of the Tenth University Faculty For Life Conference (Washington, D.C.:  University Faculty For Life, 2002), pp. 1-84, at:

http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/irv/irv_36whatisbioethics01.html.  As a First Generationer in this “bioethics”, I hold one of the few Ph.D. concentrations in bioethics the field from the KIE and Dept. of Philosophy, Georgetown University (1991).

--  DNI]




Welcome to the Dark Age of Designer Babies

by Carly Andrews


[A sobering 2014 article on alteration of the human gene pool which will have unknown consequences for the human race.  Once invoked, how can this be undone? Is this really what we want genetic science to be? ED]


As FDA holds hearing on new controversial fertility technique, Aleteia expert insists it’s a moral no-go.

The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) is holding a hearing this week in the US to consider a controversial new IFV technology that would involve the creation of test-tube babies, using the DNA from 3 separate people.  The procedure aims at preventing potentially fatal mitochondrial diseases. [emphasis - DNI]
 
Troublesome cells

Mitochondria are organelles (or tiny power stations) found in every cell of the body except for red blood cells, generating energy for the cell. They are passed from mother to child through her egg.
 
There are around 5,000 children in the US suffering from the illness.  Mitochondrial diseases are often caused by mutations – inherited or acquired – in mitochondrial DNA.  The effects can include cerebral developmental delays, muscle weakness, seizures, strokes, dementia, diabetes, blindness, deafness, short stature, respiratory problems and in the worst cases, death.
 
This latest IVF research has discovered that exchanging the defective mitochondria of the parent egg/embryo with mitochondria from a healthy donor egg/embryo, avoids passing on the disease to the infant. 
 
There are two different methods for mitochondrial repair:
 
First – intervention by embryo: 
1. The sperm fertilises two eggs; one embryo is created using the egg of the parent, and another with the egg of the donor. 
2. The nucleus (containing the genetic information) from the donor embryo is removed and destroyed.
3. The nucleus from the parent embryo (which has the unhealthy mitochondria) are removed and the remains destroyed.
4. The parents’ nucleus is inserted into the donor embryo to create a healthy embryo.
 
Second - intervention by egg:
1. A healthy donor egg and the mother’s egg with defective mitochondria are collected. 
2. The donor’s nucleus (containing most of the genetic information) is removed and destroyed.
3. The nucleus from the mother’s egg is removed and the remains destroyed. 
4. The mother's nucleus is inserted into the donor’s healthy egg, and it may now be fertilised by sperm.

The consequences of either of the above procedures mean that the child would have around 20,000 genes from their parents and about 37 mitochondrial genes from a third-party donor. The genetic inheritance of the infant would be irreversibly moderated. 
 
Moral dilemma
 
Antonio G. Spagnolo, Director of the Institute of Bioethics, Faculty of Medicine, at the Università Cattolica del S. Cuore, Rome, has spoken to Aleteia about the moral implications of this highly controversial procedure. 
 
“Undoubtedly the efforts of the researchers in attempting to eliminate pathologies of this type are commendable” he says. “Unfortunately the manner in which they proceed to resolve illnesses is very problematic and numerous moral questions must be confronted."
 
“First of all, at the heart of the matter is the unavoidable problem - which is morally negative in itself - of IVF which is what actually enables the realisation of this new procedure.”
 
The Church is very clear on the moral depravity of IVF practices, in which many human embryos are experimented on and disposed of.
 
“Respect for the dignity of the human being excludes all experimental manipulation or exploitation of the human embryo." [Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith]
 
Besides the many risks involved for both the mother and infant, the big moral problem is that the human embryo is treated as mere disposable biological material, instead of a human person.

The Church explains that the human person is a unified whole, which is “at the same time corporal and spiritual. By virtue of its substantial union with a spiritual soul, the human body cannot be considered as a mere complex of tissues, organs and functions...” 
 
Therefore “the fruit of human generation, from the first moment of its existence...from the moment the zygote has formed, demands the unconditional respect that is morally due to the human being in his bodily and spiritual totality.”
 
If the human embryo must be treated as a human person, then it is “not in conformity with the moral law deliberately to expose to death human embryos obtained 'in vitro'.”
 
But then, wouldn’t the second form of IVF be morally permissible, since it only modifies the egg and not the embryo? 

Professor Spagnolo answers that “the procedure cannot be morally permissible.”
 
Consequences unknown
 
Firstly, in addition to the foundational problem of IVF in itself being morally wrong, Spagnolo emphasises the problem of consequences.
 
“Even for those who retain that in vitro fertilisation does not have any moral problems” he explains that “they still could not help but recognise that this new procedure is, in itself, loaded with unknown elements with regards to its results."
 
Indeed there is no way to tell, from supposed initial ‘success’ in experimentation, what the long-ranging consequences of this procedure could be for the child and what physiological or psychological problems it may cause further down the line. 
 
Gene therapy
 
Secondly, Professor Spagnolo considers the risks involved with understanding the procedure in terms of “gene therapy.” 
 
He explains that the scientific community has “always considered gene therapy on germ cells in the negative sense.” 
 
The practice “deals with inserting correct genes into a germ cell before IVF” he says. “Germ gene therapy is loaded with risks since any possible harm transmitted would be done not only to the embryo in question, but also to the descendants of the embryo.”
 
Here Spagnolo brings our attention once again to the teachings of the Church. 
 
“The Catholic Magisterium reminds us: ‘because the risks connected to any genetic manipulation are considerable and as yet not fully controllable, in the present state of research, it is not morally permissible to act in a way that may cause possible harm to the resulting progeny. ...For these reasons, therefore, it must be stated that, in its current state, germ line cell therapy in all its forms is morally illicit.’” [Dignitas Personae, 26]
 
So basically, 3-person IFV treatment is a moral no-go.

"It is not enough merely to discipline by law the ways in which it is brought about" Spagnolo asserts, "since its fundamental meaning remains the same."



[Note:  Better analysis than most.  Yes, both the end/goal and the means used to reach it must be ethical.  The ends do not justify the means.

(1)  He identifies one of the major scientific consequences that seems the media wants to ignore:  the genetic engineering does not just affect the child born, but because those “foreign” genes become integrated into her germ cells (female oocytes) then those foreign genes will ALSO be passed down through the child’s future generations -- genetically altering not just the child’s genome but all her descendants and the human gene pool as well.  Thus not just one child’s problems are the issue, but also the cloning of those foreign genes down through the generations. 

(2)  I might also add that the fact that mitochondria have fewer genes than the nucleus does not therefore mean that they are “incidental” -- as demonstrated by the various mitochondrial diseases themselves. 

(3)  Approving this research -- much less clinical trials with human patients -- would thereby also approve killing the normal living human embryos used as the source of the healthy mitochondria.

(4)  How can patients in clinical trials give ethically or legally valid “informed consent” when the researchers don’t know the critical “information” they need to inform their patients -- e.g., the scientific facts, the risks and benefits, etc.?

(5)  Scientifically they don’t have a clue as to what genes are causing the problems in mitochondrial diseases.  (a)  As there are many different kinds of mitochondrial diseases, there are probably many different genetic mutations causing them.  (b)  By what genetic criteria will they determine the guilty genes when scientists still don’t know any more that 50% or less of the coding of THE Human Genome Project (which used only nuclear genes, and derived them from samples from people around the world and pooled them all together!).  Answer:  They don’t know, and can’t know.  Thus they are incapable of anticipating any dangerous consequences to the child or her descendants -- or explaining them scientifically.

(6)  A lot of research by many different scientists have shown that the normal “communication” between the nuclear genes and the mitochondrial genes is badly damaged when “foreign” mitochondrial genes are substituted for the natural mitochondrial genes -- and that causes serious damage to the organism.

(7)  And what appears to be a “beneficent” technique can also be used for maleficent purposes as well.  What if they use the same technique to inject non-human animal mitochondrial thus forming a chimera?  Or inject foreign genes desired by researchers into the donor mitochondria before injecting them into the human oocyte/embryo?  Same technique, different foreign genes.  Opens the door to all sorts of genetic engineering of human beings and their descendents.

(8)  My only pause was when he used the term “zygote”.  According to the Carnegie Stages of Early Human Embryonic Development (instituted in 1942 and updated continuously since then to the present), the formation of the human “zygote” is not when the new human being begins to exist.  The “zygote” is Stage 1c;  the embryo already exists before that point at Stages 1a and 1b.  That is, the new sexually reproduced human being begins to exist at the beginning of the process of fertilization, when the sperm penetrates and fuses with the oocyte -- not at the end of the process.  If the “zygote” is claimed to be when the human being begins to exist, that would justify using (and killing) the already existing embryo at Stages 1a and b -- which is when a great deal of human genetic engineering is performed!  Well, at least he didn’t say “conception”. The article first appeared here.  -- DNI




The Perfect 46: A “Science Factual” Film about our Near Future

by Jessica Cussins

 

Sitting down to watch the science fiction film The Perfect 46, I had the strange sensation of walking through a hall of mirrors. Intriguingly meta-conscious, and perceptibly close to reality, this film highlights the world of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetics and makes it clear that this technology, now at our real-world doorsteps, could drastically shape our very near future.  [Emphasis - DNI]

The story centers on the aptly named company ThePerfect46, which starts off with a seemingly innocuous mission. Taking advantage of the fact that most Californians have had their genomes sequenced by this undefined point in time, it simply offers to analyze a couple’s genomes alongside each other to determine their ability to have a disease-free child.  

But founder and CEO Jesse Darden isn’t content to stop there. In a move that sparks internal controversy and leads to one staff person abandoning the project, he rolls out version 2.0, which allows the company to search through giant databases and match random people together based solely on their ability to create genetically “ideal” children. The film cuts back and forth between a tense situation unfolding for Darden, flashbacks of his life, and a documentary film made about his rise and fall. 

While The Perfect 46 is a fictional film, it is being promoted by a real-life website purporting to actually sell ThePerfect46 product (kudos for the smart marketing ploy!). 

Darden, played quite well by Whit Hertford, is the star of The Perfect 46. He is a Steve Jobs-esque anti-hero: the disliked techie genius, the man behind the company that aims to improve humanity but ends up causing great harm. Darden comes across as “a tortured genius… a character that can be lauded and loathed in equal measure.” He is romanticized as smart and entrepreneurial, but his considerable personal and inter-personal flaws are never out of view. 

Perhaps by now both Darden and ThePerfect46 sound strangely familiar. If so, it’s probably because the similarities to companies and products that actually exist right now are jarring. This is a kind of science fiction that is only just barely fictional.

In fact, writer and director Brett Ryan Bonowicz calls The Perfect 46 science factual.” He invited a number of researchers to be consultants on the film and strove to show “a respect for science.” The scientific community has applauded his use of “authentic science” and raved about how the film is “a refreshing change of pace” because it doesn’t dissolve into a dystopian nightmare.  Here Bonowicz elaborates on why he pursued this approach,

By making the film as factually accurate as possible, the conversation that the film creates should, I think, spark something that a more futuristic, fantastic treatment perhaps cannot. The topics we cover in the film – genetics, eugenics, the moral and ethical implications of a consumer genetics service, and the role of government vs. a DTC model – are discussions that deserve to be out in the public. This is a film of the moment.

 In fact, you may find reality to be even more bizarre than this particular fiction. Just last year, the infamous DTC genetics company 23andMe received a patent for "gamete donor selection based on genetic calculations." The premise of the technology was that it could allow people to choose a sperm or egg provider based on probabilities of having a child with the kinds of characteristics they desired including “height, eye color, gender, personality characteristics and risk of developing certain types of cancer.” In response to backlash from the media about its “designer baby patent” with drop-down menus of characteristics, 23andMe assured everyone that it no longer had any plans to pursue the full range of possibilities described.

Another company, GenePeeks, has remained undaunted. GenePeeks launched just months ago, founded by molecular biologist Lee Silver, who writes broadly about how positive eugenics is both laudable and inevitable, and Anne Morriss, the mother of a sperm donor-conceived son who inherited the rare recessive disease MCADD.

GenePeeks’ “Matchright” is remarkably similar to the product offered by ThePerfect46For $1995, “GenePeeks digitally combines your DNA and the DNA of potential donor matches to create a preview of thousands of personal genomes that your child could inherit, focusing on a panel of genes involved in childhood health and disease.” Based on this information, you can then preview your personal “catalog” of donors and further weed them out based on your preference for such characteristics as height, eye color, hair color, education level, and ethnicity. 

What GenePeeks hasn’t marketed yet is its ability to test for much more than “health and disease.” But the patent it was awarded in January explicitly lists many non-medical traits: aggression, weight, breast size/shape, drinking behavior, drug abuse, eating behavior, ejaculation function, emotional affect, eye color/shape, hair color, height, learning/memory, mating patterns, sex, skin color/texture, and social intelligence, among others. It is thought to be possible to screen for just some of these traits, but all are covered by the patent.

Furthermore, GenePeeks doesn’t intend to limit its availability to sperm banks. It plans to expand soon and become available for “anyone planning a pregnancy in advance.” Of course, there is at least one fundamental flaw in the methodology of all these schemes: two people can have an infinite number of children with a full range of characteristics. Choosing a “preferred” donor can’t possibly absolve all risk

In fact [spoiler alert], in The Perfect 46, a bug in the company’s algorithm results in the birth of 24 children with a severe genetic disorder. The horrific mistake causes the company to close its doors and forces Darden into solitude, where he continues to develop his work and reflect on what went wrong. What is perhaps most remarkable about the scenario is that no one is ever found to be at fault, even when some of the children die, and at least one suicide results. While Darden is depicted as a broken man, devastated by the fault in a system he designed, he is relatively unmoved by personal stories, including one about a loving couple that divorced after hearing they were “incompatible.” In his mind, “Just because I created something doesn’t mean I’m responsible for how people use it.”

Is this the kind of language that will be used around technologies governing life and death in our market-driven culture? The film probes many such important questions. How quickly does the right to know become the responsibility, or even the requirement, to know? What will people do with this information? And what happens, and who is accountable, when it is wrong? 

(If 23andMe is anything to go by, some information will be wrong.)

Furthermore, can changing the kinds of people who are born really be considered “preventative medicine?” When recommendations about who is “fit” to be born are made by a commercial entity, does the absence of state involvement make the actions less eugenic? Is “perfection” what we ought to strive for? If so, what do we make of the founder – who is anxious, anti-social, awkward, not good-looking, and in the end, in “an irony that was lost on no one,” infertile?

The desire to know and control more, even when the meaning of the knowledge and our ability to control it is imperfect, can be powerful. But while it makes marketing sense for drug and genetic testing companies to pathologize more and more conditions, it probably doesn’t make sense for us. As these technologies become increasingly present in our lives, that point risks getting lost.

GenePeeks has just received $3 million in financing. The concept of adding genetic profiles to dating sites seems to be gaining steam. These trends suggest that this film could well be “more of a glimpse of the future than simply a hypothetical conversation about ethics and genetics.” 

But if The Perfect 46 is “a sort of prequel to Gattaca,” hopefully we will find a way to stop short of that future. 

You can find upcoming screenings of this thought-provoking film here, and check out CGS’s personal genomics news page here. Can you make it through the hall of mirrors, discerning the difference between fiction and reality?



[Note:  The burning question remains:  Can they really decode anyone’s genome?  Answer:  No.

Remember that the “human genome” is defined as the total DNA in both the nucleus and the mitochondria outside the nucleus of a cell.  Aside from the fact that only about 15% of  “THE” Human Genome has still only been decoded (along with problems like individual genomes are unique;  the sample consisted of mixing multiple samples from people around the world;  only the nuclear genes, and only their extrons, were addressed, etc. (see:  http://web.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/project/index.shtml), what about that part of an individual’s genome provided by the person’s mitochondria?  And what about the 85% of the nuclear genes in an individual’s cells that was called “junk DNA” in the “introns” of those nuclear genes until lately?  Are these “kits” even capable of determining the mitochondria and the “junk DNA” in those “introns”?  See, e.g.: 

--  “DNA is actually not well understood. 97% of human DNA is called ³junk² because scientists do not know its function. The workings of a single cell are so complex, no one knows the whole of it. Yet the biotech companies have already planted millions of acres with genetically engineered crops, and they intend to engineer every crop in the world.”

Genetic Engineering and “Junk” DNA, Genetic Engineering, at:  http://www.authorstream.com/Presentation/ramyasekaran-1541143-genetic-engineering/

--  The Astonishing Powers of "Junk" DNA

http://www.khouse.org/enews_article/2012/1982/

--  Most of What you Read was Wrong: How Press Releases Rewrote Scientific History, Center for Genetics and Society, at: 

http://www.geneticsandsociety.org/article.php?id=6390

--  Never-Seen-Before Secret DNA Code And An 'Unusual Meaning'-Scientists Find, at:  http://www.designntrend.com/articles/9627/20131214/never-seen-before-secret-dna-code-unusual-meaning-scientists-find.htm 

-- Junk DNA — Not So Useless After All

“Researchers report on a new revelation about the human genome: it’s full of active, functioning DNA, and it's a lot more complex than we ever thought, at:  http://healthland.time.com/2012/09/06/junk-dna-not-so-useless-after-all/

--  What Junk DNA? It’s an Operating System;  Their report adds to growing experimental support for the idea that all that extra stuff in the human genes, once referred to as “junk DNA,” is more than functionless, space-filling material that happens to make up nearly 98% of the genomehttp://www.genengnews.com/insight-and-intelligenceand153/what-junk-dna-it-s-an-operating-system/77899872/ 

Given that their claims don’t even mention those DNA’s gives an indication that they don’t.  So what does an individual who buys such “kits” really end of knowing about their genome -- and how can any medical or eugenic decisions be based on such “information”?  Indeed, how can any supposed “ideal child” be genetically designed at all?  Is so-called “positive eugenics” a bunch of nonsense?  Perhaps the above, too, is a “discussion that deserves to be out in the public”!  In fact, much of what passes as "genetics research" and the "kits" described below would seem to border on scientific fraud -- and someone should be held legally accountable. The article first appeared here.

Caveat emptor!  --  DNI]



Medical Murder? Mass Woman Medically Kidnapped from Home Dies After Being Denied Medical Intervention

by Health Impact News/MedicalKidnap.com Staff

Lawyers and guardians denied Beverley Finnegan the life-saving treatment her sister wanted her to have. The guardianship cost her life. Photo source.


As the icy blast of the historic “bomb cyclone” chilled the heart of Boston and flooded her streets, an even more chilling battle was taking place over the life of 69 year old Beverley Finnegan.

The fight to get court-appointed guardians and attorneys to allow her to receive life-saving medical treatment has ended with her death just before noon on Friday, January 5, 2018.

See Beverley’s story here:


Her tragic death follows the one day that her sister and advocate Janet Pidge were not able to be by her side at Framington Union Hospital. The brutal snowstorm kept Janet, as well as many other residents in the greater Boston area, home and off the streets on Thursday.

“A Turn for the Worse” – During a Crippling Snowstorm

Beverley’s condition was largely unchanged during the last several weeks, so the Friday morning phone call came as a shock.

Gary Zalkin, attorney for Framington Union Hospital, left a voicemail at 8:30 a.m. saying that that she had taken “a turn for the worse” and would likely pass within the next hour or so.

Janet was already en route to the hospital to be by her sister’s side. Advocate and journalist David Arnold told Health Impact News that he joined Janet in Beverley’s hospital room. He reports that her heart stopped several times, while doctors kept saying that her brain had shut down. Finally, her heart stopped beating for the last time, and she was pronounced dead at 11:48 a.m.

Janet’s attorney Lisa Belanger calls it “euthanasia” – the hastening of Beverley Finnegan’s death. Belanger attempted to file a criminal complaint on Saturday, since euthanasia is illegal in Massachusetts. However, the police denied her request, telling her to file medical malpractice instead. She told Health Impact News:

This is worse than the Twilight Zone.

Kidnapped and Denied Civil Rights over Medical Disagreement

For months, Beverley Finnegan and her sister Janet Pidge have been battling the state of Massachusetts to bring her home. The sisters owned a condo together, and they relied on each other. Several years ago Ms. Finnegan named her sister as her proxy if ever she needed someone to make decisions for her. Her wishes were completely ignored.

A doctor diagnosed her with an illness that, in hindsight, she may never have had. Dr. Anne McKinley said that she had a lung infection called Mycobacterium kansasii and that she would die without treatment. When Ms. Finnegan chose not to go back to that particular doctor, Dr. McKinley filed a protective order with the courts.

Police and social workers broke into the condo and seized her. Because she fought against her kidnappers, she was deemed mentally ill and violent. She was bodily seized and forced against her will into a nursing home and forced onto psychotropic drugs.

The door frame was broken during Beverley Finnegan’s state-sanctioned abduction, yet she was labeled “paranoid.” Photo source: Boston Broadside.

For months, she begged and pleaded to go home, saying that they were going to kill her. The presumably imaginary infection that was used as a pretense to deprive her of her liberty was never addressed – not once.

Stranger Named as Her Guardian, While Sister Fights Back

Lawyers petitioned for, and won, the ability to override Ms. Finnegan’s wishes, and a judge appointed a guardian with Jewish Family and Children’s Services. Under a draconian legal construct known as “guardianship,” Marissa Levenson was granted the authority to make life-altering decisions for a woman she had never before met.

Marissa Levenson, guardian with Jewish Family and Children’s Services, was given authority to place Ms. Finnegan into a nursing home against her will. Photo source: Boston Broadside>.

According to Lonnie Brennan of the Boston Broadside, who met with Janet Pidge and has attended some of the court hearings:

Beverly’s sister, Janet, is hysterically desperate: she’s fighting daily to get anyone to help. Janet can’t stop talking about her sister, non-stop. She’s anxious, desperate, and determined to get someone to listen. She’s spent her savings, she’s knocked on seemingly every door of every lawyer or politician she could find.

She’s been lied to along the way in the same way her sister was lied to. She is called delusional and paranoid for not believing the state.

She can’t stop. She fights on. She’s determined and gets into rants about the shock of the taking of her sister, long-term problems at her condo with certain neighbors, and the tragic history of her family (for which a movie should be set).

Her money is gone and she’s stuck asking for rides daily or help to pay for the trains to take her from Newton to Framingham each day where she prays at her sister’s side. 


Life-Saving Medical Measures Denied

Lisa Belanger says that the decline in Ms. Finnegan’s health was directly related to fact that the state placed her under guardianship. Under that guardianship, she was forced into a nursing home that did not properly care for her. Due to their alleged neglect and possibly actively harmful practices, Ms. Finnegan wound up in a coma on November 30, and doctors have neglected basic medical care that could have saved her life.

On December 18 and again on December 22, Belanger went head to head in court with a gaggle of attorneys and guardians who were determined to pull the plug and end Beverley Finnegan’s life, against the adamant wishes of her sister.

On one side were the guardian and attorneys for Framington Union Hospital, Jewish Family and Children’s Services, and Springwell – a non-profit organization utilized by the state of Massachusetts to implement Adult Protective Services policies.

They all argued that it would be more compassionate to pull the plug than allow her to live life under the current circumstances.

Lisa Belanger argued for Ms. Finnegan’s basic Constitutional right to life. She presented an affidavit from renowned medical expert Dr. Paul Byrne dated December 22, in which he stated that she did “not fulfill any set of ‘brain death’ criteria.”

Dr. Byrne laid out specific medical protocols that should have been taken already but hadn’t. He said that if they would initiate such treatment immediately, Beverley’s health should improve.

Since that time, Lisa Belanger engaged in a life and death struggle to get the hospital to do the basic medical treatments that could have saved Ms. Finnegan’s life. She sent numerous requests to the newly appointed Guardian ad Litem Joanne Moses and to the various attorneys involved, including the hospital’s attorney Gary Zalkin.

Her every attempt was rebuffed.

Counsel for Framington Union Hospital, Gary Zalkin. Photo source.

Even though Beverley’s sister and her attorney were clear that they wanted such measures being taken, Zalkin reportedly said that they would have to wait until the new Guardian ad Litem approved of the tracheostomy and they were all able to go before the judge again for approval.

Lisa Belanger countered with:

EVERY SECOND THAT GOES BY YOU AND YOUR CLIENT ARE OVERTLY DEPRIVING MY CLIENT’S SISTER OF WHATEVER RECOVERY IS POSSIBLE.

To confirm, Judge Monks expressly stated that Metro West HAS AUTHORITY to perform emergency necessitated procedures–that such procedures do not require a court order.  Again, the emergency procedures are laid out by Dr. Byrne in his provided affidavits that you have received.

As already substantiated from the documentation I provided you, you and your client’s FAILURE TO ACT continues to be knowingly and deliberately causing overt harm to my client’s sister, Beverley Finnegan.

None of the life-saving procedures were initiated. On the day that Beverley’s sister could not be with her at the hospital due to the massive snowstorm, her health suddenly declined. By the time Janet Pidge and Lisa Belanger got word of her demise, all of the government offices to which they could have turned were closed due to the storm.

They were completely helpless to stop what they see as Ms. Finnegan’s needless death. Because of the guardianship, Beverley’s trusted loved one was powerless to intervene to save her life.

This woman who was functional, in full control of her mind, and able to walk and care for herself on her own just a few months ago is gone – another victim of guardianship.

David Arnold has written several articles on the dangers of guardianship. He told Health Impact News:

Guardianship is a form of slavery, but it is actually far worse than slavery. It needs to be abolished.

With guardianship, they want to rob them and kill them.

Conflicts of Interest: Psychotherapist, Jewish Family and Child Services All Complicit in Death

Even though the sisters lived in a large metropolitan area, the small group of players involved in their case have worked together in a number of similar guardianship cases, according to public records.

Jewish Family and Child Services seems to be a major player in the region. They played a significant role in the decisions leading to the rapid decline of Beverley Finnegan’s health.

Attorneys Gary Zalkin, Lawrence K. Glick, and Wendy K. Crenshaw each appear on the dockets of many guardianship cases in various roles – alternately as counsel for the ward, counsel for the petitioner for guardianship, the petitioner, or guardian.

There are cases where the same attorney’s name shows up in the record in more than one role. In a case from 2016, Case #BR16P0649GD, Gary Zalkin is listed as the attorney for the ward, the petitioner on behalf of the facility wanting to place the ward under guardianship, and as the guardian himself. That is three conflicting roles – all represented by the same attorney.

Zalkin practiced for 14 years as a psychotherapist (Source) before attending law school. He has lectured and written on the practice of guardianship, and has apparently found his niche. According to his website:

Attorney Gary Zalkin wrote the chapter in the Mental Health volume of the Massachusetts Practice Series that explains the new guardianship and conservatorship laws. He has additionally pioneered the affirmation of health care proxies for mental health issues in Massachusetts. He has served as chair of the Riverside Community Care Human Rights Committee and as president of the Board of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill of Massachusetts, MetroWest affiliate.

In 2005 Attorney Zalkin was honored by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly as one of fifteen “rising stars – Massachusetts lawyers who have been members of the bar 10 years or less, but who have already distinguished themselves in some manner and appear poised for even greater things.”

Attorney Gary Zalkin received his B.A. in psychology from Brandeis University in 1989 and his M.S.W. from Simmons College School of Social Work in 1992.

Gary Zalkin is also “a member of the Harvard Medical School’s Program in Psychiatry and the Law.” (Source).

Cover-up of Medical Malpractice?

How is it that a person can lose every Constitutional and human right, including the rights to make personal and medical decisions, refuse medical treatment, live in her own home, be autonomous, and choose to live – based on a letter from a doctor not backed up with evidence?

Framington Union Hospital. Photo taken by an advocate, name withheld by request.

What really happened to Beverley Finnegan – both in the nursing home before her hospitalization and in the hospital during the snowstorm, during the time that her sister could not watch over her and try to protect her?

Is there a cover-up happening of medical malpractice?

What kind of benefit is there to those parties networked together? Why are there so many entities and individuals working to take away the basic human rights of senior citizens?

How can citizens protect themselves from the tyrannical overreach of people operating under the color of law to take all their worldly goods as well as their very liberty? Is anyone safe?

Beverley Finnegan’s voice has been silenced. Will her death go unnoticed, or will it mean something? Who will speak out for justice for her and for countless others whose lives are being stolen?


Other Adult Guardianship Stories We Have Covered:

Medical Kidnapping of Seniors: A $273 BILLION Industry

Obamacare: America’s Elder Medical Kidnapping Epidemic is Leaving Seniors Homeless







Deadly Medicine Creating the Master Race

by John Carlos Cantu           


U-M Taubman Health Sciences Library exhibit presents a chilling look at Nazi ideology.

The 1938 words of Dr. Joseph Goebbels, Nazi minister of propaganda, stand above the display panels of what is undoubtedly the most somber exhibit Ann Arbor has seen at the University of Michigan Taubman Health Sciences Library.  Goebbel’s quote runs as follows: “Our starting point is not the individual, and we do not subscribe to the view that one should feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, or clothe the naked…. Our objectives are entirely different: We must have a healthy people in order to prevail in the world.” 

These words are chilling and they’re more than an adequate rationale for this heart-rending investigation into a politics that sought to implement one of the most perverse policies in history. 

As Mary Beth Reilly, writer for the U-M’s Center for the History of Medicine, says in the display’s gallery statement, “The Nazi regime was founded upon the conviction that ‘inferior races’ and individuals had to be eliminated from German society so that the fittest ‘Aryans’ could thrive. 

“By the end of World War II, six million Jews and millions of others—among them Roma and Sinti (Gypsies), people with disabilities, homosexuals, and others belonging to ethnic groups deemed inferior—had been persecuted and murdered.”  And as Alexandra Minna Stern, Zina Pitcher Collegiate Professor of the History of Medicine and Associate Director of the Center for the History of Medicine at the U-M Medical School, adds, “The exhibition is a visually powerful experience for viewers that shows how the doctrine of racial hygiene was taken to its most heinous extremes.” 

Indeed. And as the exhibit pointedly illustrates, there’s more than enough blame to go around. For the exhibit begins with a panel illustrating the various programs from countries around the world (including the United States) advocating various eugenic schemes at the turn of the 20th century whose “racial hygiene” included programs in population policy, public health education, and government-funded research whose ends (even if they weren’t remotely the same) clearly showed an undeniable bias.  

The rediscovery of Austrian botanist Gregor Mendel’s genetics experiments in 1900 coupled with the increasingly fashionable “Social Darwinism” of British philosopher cum sociologist Herbert Spencer, whose catchphrase “survival of the fittest” was being bandied about, led to increasing public prestige in the efforts to stabilize public policy issues that emerged with increasing industrialization and urbanization. This was, in retrospect, a philosophical and political slippery slope that was in part absorbed in the ideology and practice of the newly emergent Nazi party of the 1920s. 

From the early 1930s through the balance of the Nazi regime, there were repeated campaigns to rid German society of what they viewed as biological threats. As “Deadly Medicine” clearly shows, this policy absorbed the efforts and energies of many of the nation’s most talented doctors, psychiatrists, anthropologists, and medically trained geneticists, as well as social planners and party functionaries at every level.  [And soon to be repeated in the form of Obamacare - ED] 

What started as a secret campaign to eliminate the weak and infirm disguised as medical assistance metastasized into a full-fledge program of eradication under the pressure of World War II. Ultimately, this so-called “sanitary campaign” finally took form as a genocide that we now know as the Holocaust, resulting in the near total annihilation of Europe’s Jewish population. 

To its credit, “Deadly Medicine” doesn’t pull any punches. Its juxtaposition of scientific certitude and racial hatred are handled as responsibly as the topics deserve. 

By naming names, dates, and events—as well as providing significant visual evidence—the exhibit takes the full measure of this circumstance where those in charge of healing and sustenance distorted their responsibilities until their lifework turned into a horror whose pain continues to this day.  

It’s certainly enough pain for Professor Stern to remind us that the example of this massive failure of science, technology, tolerance, and ultimately compassion, “raises weighty questions about the potential benefits and harms of genetic and reproductive technologies today.” And it’s on this cautionary note that the solemn exhibit rightfully concludes.

 

 




“It’s certainly enough pain for Professor Stern to remind us that the example of this massive failure of science, technology, tolerance, and ultimately compassion, “raises weighty questions about the potential benefits and harms of genetic and reproductive technologies today.” And it’s on this cautionary note that the solemn exhibit rightfully concludes.”  The article first appeared here. - DNI


Human Experiments: A Chronology of Human Research

by Vera Hassner Shara


6th century B.C.: Meat and vegetable experiment on young Jewish prisoners in Book of Daniel.

5th century B.C: "Primum non nocere" ("First do no harm"), medical ethics standard attributed to Hippocrates. This Oath became obligatory for physicians prior to practicing medicine in the 4th century AD

1st century B.C. Cleopatra devised an experiment to test the accuracy of the theory that it takes 40 days to fashion a male fetus fully and 80 days to fashion a female fetus. When her handmaids were sentenced to death under government order, Cleopatra had them impregnated and subjected them to subsequent operations to open their wombs at specific times of gestation. [http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/NaziMedExNotes.html#1]

12th century: Rabbi and physician Maimonides' Prayer: "May I never see in the patient anything but a fellow creature in pain."

1796 Edward Jenner injects healthy eight-year-old James Phillips first with cowpox then three months later with smallpox and is hailed as discoverer of smallpox vaccine.

1845-1849: J. Marion Sims, "the father of gynecology" performed multiple experimental surgeries on enslaved African women without the benefit of anesthesia. After suffering unimaginable pain, many lost their lives to infection. One woman was made to endure 34 experimental operations for a prolapsed uterus. http://www.coax.net/people/lwf/jm_sims.htm

1865: French physiologist Claude Bernard publishes "Introduction to the Study of Human Experimentation," advising: "Never perform an experiment which might be harmful to the patient even though highly advantageous to science or the health of others."

1896: Dr. Arthur Wentworth performed spinal taps on 29 children at Children's Hospital, Boston, to determine if the procedure was harmful. Dr. John Roberts of Philadelphia, noting the non-therapeutic indication, labeled Wentworth's procedures "human vivisection."

1897: Italian bacteriologist Sanarelli injects five subjects with bacillus searching for a causative agent for yellow fever.

1900: Walter Reed injects 22 Spanish immigrant workers in Cuba with the agent for yellow fever paying them $100 if they survive and $200 if they contract the disease. 

1900: Berlin Code of Ethics. Royal Prussian Minister of Religion, Education, and Medical Affairs guaranteed that: "all medical interventions for other than diagnostic, healing, and immunization purposes, regardless of other legal or moral authorization are excluded under all circumstances if (1) the human subject is a minor or not competent due to other reasons; (2) the human subject has not given his unambiguous consent; (3) the consent is not preceded by a proper explanation of the possible negative consequences of the intervention."http://www.geocities.com/artnscience/00berlincode.pdf

1906: Dr. Richard Strong, a professor of tropical medicine at Harvard, experiments with cholera on prisoners in the Philippines killing thirteen.

1913: Pennsylvania House of Representatives recorded that 146 children had been inoculated with syphilis, "through the courtesy of the various hospitals" and that 15 children in St. Vincent's House in Philadelphia had had their eyes tested with tuberculin. Several of these children became permanently blind. The experimenters were not punished.

1915: A doctor in Mississippi, working for the U.S. Public Health Office produces Pellagra in twelve Mississippi inmates in an attempt to discover a cure for the disease

1919-1922: Testicular transplant experiments on five hundred prisoners at San Quentin.

1927: Carrie Buck of Charlottesville is legally sterilized against her will at the Virginia Colony Home for the Mentally Infirm. Carrie Buck was the mentally normal daughter of a mentally retarded mother, but under the Virginia law, she was declared potentially capable of having a "less than normal child." By the 1930s, seventeen states in the U.S. have laws permitting forced sterilization.  The settlement of Poe v. Lynchburg Training School and Hospital (same institution, different name) in 1981 brought to an end the Virginia law. It is estimated that as many as 10,000 perfectly normal women were forcibly sterilized for "legal" reasons including alcoholism, prostitution, and criminal behavior in general.

1931: Lubeck, Germany, 75 children die in from pediatrician's experiment with tuberculosis vaccine.  

Germany adopts "Regulation on New Therapy and Experimentation" requiring all human experiments to be preceded by animal experiments. This law remained in effect during the Nazi regime.

1931: Dr. Cornelius Rhoads, a pathologist, conducted a cancer experiment in Puerto Rico under the auspices of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Investigations. Dr. Rhoads has been accused of purposely infecting his Puerto Rican subjects with cancer cells. Thirteen of the subjects died. A Puerto Rican physician uncovered the experiment an investigation covered-up the facts. Despite Rhoads' hand written statements that the Puerto Rican population should be eradicated, Rhoads went on to establish U.S. Army Biological Warfare facilities in Maryland, Utah, and Panama, and was later named to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. Rhoads was also responsible for the radiation experiments on prisoners, hospital patients, and soldiers. The American Association for Cancer Research honored him by naming its exemplary scientist award the Cornelius Rhoads Award.

1932-1972: U.S. Public Health Service study in Tuskegee, Alabama of more than 400 black sharecroppers observed for the natural course of untreated syphilis.

1932: Japanese troops invade Manchuria. Dr. Shiro Ishii, a prominent physician and army officer begins preliminary germ warfare experiments. 

1936: Japan's Wartime Human Biowarfare Experimentation Program.

1938: Japan establishes Unit 731 in Pingfan, 25 km. from Harbin. Unit 731, a biological-warfare unit disguised as a water-purification unit, is formed outside the city of Harbin.

1939: Third Reich orders births of all twins be registered with Public Health Offices for purpose of genetic research.  [[One twin experimented on, the other twin used as a genetic “control”. -- DNI]]

1939: Twenty-two children living at the Iowa Soldiers' Orphans' Home in Davenport were the subjects of the "monster" experiment that used psychological pressure to induce children who spoke normally to stutter. It was designed by one of the nation's most prominent speech pathologists, Dr. Wendell Johnson, to test his theory on the cause of stuttering.

1940: Poisonous gas experiments at Unit 731 (Japan). One experiment conducted September 7-10, 1940, on 16 Chinese prisoners who were exposed to mustard gas in a simulated battle situation.

1940-1941: Unit 731 (Japan) used aircraft to spread cotton and rice husks contaminated with the black plague at Changde and Ningbo, in central China. About 100 people died from the black plague in Ningbo as a result.

1940's: In a crash program to develop new drugs to fight Malaria during World War II, doctors in the Chicago area infected nearly 400 prisoners with the disease. Although the Chicago inmates were given general information that they were helping with the war effort, they were not informed about the nature of the experiment. Nazi doctors on trial at Nuremberg cited the Chicago studies as precedents to defend their own research aimed at aiding the German war effort.

1941: Sterilization experiments at Auschwitz.

1941-1945: Typhus experiments at Buchenwald and Natzweiler concentration camps.

1941: Dr. William c. Black inoculated a twelve month old baby with herpes. He was criticized by Francis Payton Rous, editor of the Journal of Experimental Medicine, who called it "an abuse of power, an infringement of the rights of an individual, and not excusable because the illness which followed had implications for science." Dr. Rous rejected outright the fact that the child had been "offered as a volunteer."

1942 - 1945: Unit 731 (Japan). Ishii begins "field tests" of germ warfare and vivisection experiments on thousands of Chinese soldiers and civilians. Chinese people who rebelled against the Japanese occupation were arrested and sent to Pingfan where they became human guinea pigs; there is evidence that some Russian prisoners were also victims of medical atrocities. "I cut him open from the chest to the stomach and he screamed terribly and his face was all twisted in agony. He made this unimaginable sound, he was screaming so horribly. But then finally he stopped. This was all in a day's work for the surgeons, but it really left an impression on me because it was my first time." - NYT

These prisoners were called 'maruta' (literally 'logs') by the Japanese. After succumbing to induced diseases - including bubonic plague, cholera, anthrax - the prisoners were usually dissected while still alive, their bodies then cremated within the compound. Tens of thousands died. The atrocities were committed by some of Japan's most distinguished doctors recruited by Dr. Ishii.

1942: High altitude or low pressure experiments at Dachau concentration camp.

1942: Harvard biochemist Edward Cohn injects sixty-four Massachusetts prisoners with beef blood in U.S. Navy-sponsored experiment.

1942: Japanese sprayed cholera, typhoid, plague, and dysentery pathogens in the Jinhua area of Zhejian province (China). A large number of Japanese soldiers also fell victim to the sprayed diseases.

1942-1943: Bone regeneration and transplantation experiments on female prisoners at Ravensbrueck concentration camp.

1942-1943: Freezing experiments at Dachau concentration camp.

1943 Refrigeration experiment conducted on sixteen mentally disabled patients who were placed in refrigerated cabinets at 30 degree Farenheit, for 120 hours, at University of Cincinnati Hospital., "to study the effect of frigid temperature on mental disorders."

1942-1943: Coagulation experiments on Catholic priests at Dachau concentration camp.

1942-1944: U.S. Chemical Warfare Service conducts mustard gas experiments on thousands of servicemen.

1942-1945: Malaria experiments at Dachau concentration camp on more than twelve hundred prisoners.

1943: Epidemic jaundice experiments at Natzweiler concentration camp.

1943-1944: Phosphorus burn experiments at Buchenwald concentration camp.

1944: Manhattan Project injection of 4.7 micrograms of plutonium into soldiers at Oak Ridge, TN.

1944: Seawater experiment on sixty Gypsies who were given only saltwater to drink at Dachau concentration camp.

1944-1946: University of Chicago Medical School professor Dr. Alf Alving conducts malaria experiments on more than 400 Illinois prisoners.

1945: Manhattan Project injection of plutonium into three patients at Billings Hospital at University of Chicago.

1945: Malaria experiment on 800 prisoners in Atlanta.

1946: Opening of Nuremberg Doctors Trial by U.S. Military Tribunal.

1945: Japanese troops blow up the headquarters of Unit 731 in final days of Pacific war. Ishii orders 150 remaining ''logs'' (i.e., human beings) killed to cover up their experimentation. Gen. Douglas MacArthur is named commander of the Allied powers in Japan.

1946: U.S. secret deal with Ishii and Unit 731 leaders cover up of germ warfare data based on human experimentation in exchange for immunity from war-crimes prosecution.

1946-1953: Atomic Energy Commission sponsored study conducted at the Fernald school in Massachusetts. Residents were fed Quaker Oats breakfast cereal containing radioactive tracers.

1946: Patients in VA hospitals are used as guinea pigs for medical experiments. In order to allay suspicions, the order is given to change the word "experiments" to "investigations" or "observations" whenever reporting a medical study performed in one of the nation's veteran's hospitals.

1947: Colonel E.E. Kirkpatrick of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission issues a secret document (Document 07075001, January 8, 1947) stating that the agency will begin administering intravenous doses of radioactive substances to human subjects.

1947: The CIA begins its study of LSD as a potential weapon for use by American intelligence. Human subjects (both civilian and military) are used with and without their knowledge.

1947: Judgment at Nuremberg Doctors Trial sets forth "Permissible Medical Experiments" i.e., the Nuremberg Code, which begins: "The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential."

1949: Intentional release of radiodine 131 and xenon 133 over Hanford Washington in Atomic Energy Commission field study called "Green Run."

1949: Soviet Union's war crimes trial of Dr. Ishii's associates (Japan).

1949-1953: Atomic Energy Commission studies of mentally disabled school children fed radioactive isotopes at Fernald and Wrentham schools.

1940s-1950s: "psychic driving" and "mental departterning" experiments conducted by Dr. Ewen Cameron, depriving patients of sleep, using massive ECT combined with psychoactive drugs such as, LSD. After his "treatments" patients were unable to function. In the 1950's Dr.Cameron's experiments were sponsored by the CIA.

1950: Dr. Joseph Stokes of the University of Pennsylvania infects 200 women prisoners with viral hepatitis.

1950: U.S. Army secretly used a Navy ship outside the Golden Gate to spray supposedly harmless bacteria over San Francisco and its outskirts. Eleven people were sickened by the germs, and one of them died.

1951-1960: University of Pennsylvania under contract with U.S. Army conducts psychopharmacological experiments on hundreds of Pennsylvania prisoners.

1952-1974: University of Pennsylvania dermatologist Dr. Albert Kligman conducts skin product experiments by the hundreds at Holmesburg Prison; "All I saw before me," he has said about his first visit to the prison, "were acres of skin."

1952: Henry Blauer injected with a fatal dose of mescaline at New York State Psychiatric Institute of Columbia University. U.S. Department of Defense, the sponsor, conspired to conceal evidence for 23 years.

1953 Newborn Daniel Burton rendered blind at Brooklyn Doctor's Hospital due to high oxygen study on RLF.

1953-1957: Oak Ridge (TN)-sponsored injection of uranium into eleven patients at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

1953-1960: CIA brainwashing experiments with LSD at eighty institutions on hundreds of subjects in a project code named "MK-ULTRA."

1953-1970: U.S. Army experiments with LSD on soldiers at Fort Detrick, Md.

1954-1974: U.S. Army study of 2,300 Seventh-Day Adventist soldiers in 157 experiments code named "Operation Whitecoat."

1950s - 1972: Mentally disabled children at Willowbrook School (NY) were deliberately infected with hepatitis in an attempt to find a vaccine. Participation in the study was a condition for admission to institution.

1956: Dr. Albert Sabin tests experimental polio vaccine on 133 prisoners in Ohio.

1958-1962: Spread of radioactive materials over Inupiat land in Point Hope, Alaska in Atomic Energy Commission field study code named "Project Chariot."

1962: Thalidomide withdrawn from the market after thousands of birth deformities blamed in part on misleading results of animal studies; the FDA thereafter requires three phases of human clinical trials before a drug can be approved for the market.

1962 to 1966, a total of 33 pharmaceutical companies tested 153 experimental drugs at Holmesburg prison (PA) alone.

1962-1980 Pharmaceutical companies conduct phase I safety testing of drugs almost exclusively on prisoners for small cash payments.

1962: Injection of live cancer cells into 22 elderly patients at Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital in Brooklyn. Administration covered up, NYS licensing board placed the principal investigator on probation for one year. Two years later, American Cancer Society elected him Vice President.

1962: Stanley Milgram conducts obedience research at Yale University.

1963: NIH supported researcher transplants chimpanzee kidney into human in failed experiment.

1963-1973: Dr. Carl Heller, a leading endocrinologist, conducts testicular irradiation experiments on prisoners in Oregon and Washington giving them $5 a month and $100 when they receive a vasectomy at the end of the trial.

1964: World Medical Association adopts Helsinki Declaration, asserting "The interests of science and society should never take precedence over the well being of the subject."

 1965-1966: University of Pennsylvania under contract with Dow Chemical conducts dioxin experiments on prisoners at Holmesburg.

 1966: Henry Beecher's article "Ethics and Clinical Research" in New England Journal of Medicine.

 1966: U.S. Army introduces bacillus globigii into New York subway tunnels in field study.

 1966: NIH Office for Protection of Research Subjects ("OPRR") created and issues Policies for the Protection of Human Subjects calling for establishment of independent review bodies later known as Institutional Review Boards.

1967: British physician M.H. Pappworth publishes "Human Guinea Pigs," advising "No doctor has the right to choose martyrs for science or for the general good."

1969: Judge Sam Steinfield's eloquent dissent in Strunk v. Strunk, 445 S.W.2d 145, the first judicial suggestion that the Nuremberg Code should influence American jurisprudence.

1969. Milledgeville Georgia, investigational drugs tested on mentally disabled children. No institutional approval.

1969: San Antonio Contraceptive Study conducted on 70 poor Mexican-American women. Half received oral contraceptives the other placebo. No informed consent.

1973 Ad Hoc Advisory Panel issues Final Report of Tuskegee Syphilis Study, concluding "Society can no longer afford to leave the balancing of individual rights against scientific progress to the scientific community."

1974: National Research Act establishes National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects and requires Public Health Service to promulgate regulations for the protection of human subjects.  [[The NRA also mandated that then-Secretary of DHHS Casper Weinburger appoint a committee to determine the 'ethical principles the US government should use in dealing with the use of human subjects in research.  Thus the National Commission was established in 1975, consisting of 11 appointed members, only one (Art Caplan) with a Ph.D. in philosophy (ethics is a subfield of philosophy). (Caplan is now on the Board of Trustees of the transhumanist Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET)). In 1978/9 the National Commission submitted its Belmont Report -- the formal 'birth of bioethics' -- denoting three ethical principles:  respect for persons (which was rapidly replaced by autonomy), justice and beneficence (all oddly defined).  The NRA also mandated that the Belmont Report be incorporated on the first page of the revised OPRR federal regulations (now OHRP), done in 1981.  In those OPRR federal regulations, the 'human embryo' is nowhere defined as a 'subject of research' or otherwise -- thus legally does not exist.  Two false scientific definitions are incorporated into those OPRR regulations:  both 'pregnancy and fetus' are mis-defined as 'beginning at implantation'.  Real natural normal pregnancy begins at fertilization in the woman's fallopian tube (not in her uterus), and the 'fetal period' doesn't really begin until the beginning of 9 weeks post-fertilization. Thus theoretically,  according to these federal regulations (still operative as the OHRP regulations), abortions, the use of abortifacients, human embryo flushing, research on all human embryos in vitro in IVF/ART facilities can be 'legally' performed through 8 weeks post-fertilization. The USCCB official who inserted these two false scientific definitions was Richard Doerflinger. Of course, these federal regulations would also allow for all the genetic engineering (including synthetic biology and nanotechnology) of human embryos -- in vivo or in vitro -- so popular today.  -- DNI]]

1975: The Department of Health, Education and Welfare (DHEW) raised NIH's 1966 Policies for the Protection of Human subjects to regulatory status. Title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations, known as "The Common Rule," requires the appointment and utilization of institutional review boards (IRBs).

1976: National Urban League holds National Conference on Human Experimentation, announcing "We don't want to kill science but we don't want science to kill, mangle and abuse us."

1978: Experimental Hepatitis B vaccine trials, conducted by the CDC, begin in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Ads for research subjects specifically ask for promiscuous homosexual men.

1979: National Commission issues Belmont Report setting forth three basic ethical principles: respect for persons, beneficence, and justice.

1980: The FDA promulgates 21 CFR 50.44 prohibiting use of prisoners as subjects in clinical trials shifting phase I testing by pharmaceutical companies to non-prison population.

1981: Leonard Whitlock suffers permanent brain damage after deep diving experiment at Duke University.

1986: Congressional subcommittee holds one-day hearing in Washington, called by Rep. Pat Williams of Montana, aimed at determining whether U.S. prisoners of war in Manchuria were victims of germ-warfare experimentation. Hearing is inconclusive.

1981-1996: Protocol 126 at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle.

1987: Supreme Court decision in United States v. Stanley, 483 U.S. 669, holding soldier given LSD without his consent could not sue U.S. Army for damages.

1987:" L-dopa challenge and relapse" experiment conducted on 28 U.S. veterans who were subjected to psychotic relapse for study purposes at the Bronx VA.

1990: The FDA grants Department of Defense waiver of Nuremberg Code for use of unapproved drugs and vaccines in Desert Shield.

1991: World Health Organization announces CIOMS Guidelines which set forth four ethical principles: respect for persons, beneficence, nonmaleficence and justice.

1991: Tony LaMadrid commits suicide after participating in study on relapse of schizophrenics withdrawn from medication at UCLA.

1993: Kathryn Hamilton dies 44 days after participating in breast cancer experiment at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle.

1994. The Albuquerque Tribune publicizes 1940s experiments involving plutonium injection of human research subjects and secret radiation experiments. Indigent patients and mentally retarded children were deceived about the nature of their treatment.

1994. President Clinton appoints the Advisory Commission on Human Radiation Experiments (ACHRE) The ACHRE Report http://tis.eh.doe.gov/ohre/roadmap/achre/index.html

1995. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published Human Radiation Experiments, listing 150 plus an additional 275 radiation experiments conducted by DOE and the Atomic Energy Commission, during the 1940s - 1970s. http://tis.eh.doe.gov/ohre/roadmap/experiments/0491doca.html#0491_List

1995: 19-year-old University of Rochester student Nicole Wan dies after being paid $150 to participate in MIT-sponsored experiment to test airborne pollutant chemicals.

1995. President Clinton appoints the National Bioethics Advisory Commission.

1995: NYS Supreme Court rules (TD v NYS Office of Mental Health) against the state's policy of conducting nontherapeutic experiments on mentally incapacitated persons - including children - without informed consent. Justice Edward Greenfield ruled that parents have no authority to volunteer their children: "Parents may be free to make martyrs of themselves, but it does not follow that they may make martyrs of their children."

1995: Thirty-four healthy, previously non-aggressive New York City minority children, boys aged 6 to 11 years old, were exposed to fenfluramine in a nontherapeutic experiment at the New York State Psychiatric Institute. The children were exposed to this neurotoxic drug to record their neurochemical response in an effort to prove a speculative theory linking aggression to a biological marker.

1996. Cleveland Plain Dealer investigative report series, 'Drug Trials: Do People Know the Truth About Experiments,' December 15 to 18, 1996. The Plain-Dealer found: of the "4,154 FDA inspections of researchers testing new drugs on people [since 1977] . . . more than half the researchers were cited by FDA inspectors for failing to clearly disclose the experimental nature of their work."

1996: Yale University researchers publish findings of experiment that subjected 18 stable schizophrenia patients to psychotic relapse in an amphetamine provocation experiment at West Haven VA.

1997. President Clinton issues a formal apology to the subjects of the Tuskegee syphilis experiments. NBAC continues investigation into genetics, consent, privacy, and research on persons with mental disorders.

1997. Researchers at the University of Cincinnati publish findings of experiment attempting to create a "psychosis model" on human beings at the Cincinnati VA. Sixteen patients, experiencing a first episode schizophrenia, were subjected to repeated provocation with amphetamine. The stated purpose was to produce "behavioral sensitization. This process serves as a model for the development of psychosis, but has been little studied in humans. Symptoms, such as severity of psychosis and eye-blink rates, were measured hourly for 5 hours."

1997. U.S. government sponsored placebo-controlled experiment withholds treatment from HIV infected, pregnant African women. NY Times, Sept. 18.

1997. Victims of unethical research at major U.S. medical centers - including the NIMH - testify before the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Sept. 18.

1997. FDA Modernization Act gives pharmaceutical companies a huge financial incentive - a 6 month patent exclusivity extension - if they conduct drug tests on children. The incentive can yield $900 million.

1998. National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) Report. Research Involving Subjects with Mental Disorders That May Affect Decisionmaking Capacity. November 12,

1998 http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/nbac/capacity/TOC.htm

1998: The Japanese government has never formally apologized for Unit 731's activities, and did not even admit to its existence until August 1998, when the Supreme Court ruled that the existence of the unit was accepted in academic circles.

1998. Complaint filed with OPRR about experiments that exposed non-violent children in New York City to fenfluramine to find a predisposition to violence.

1998: Boston Globe (four part) series, "Doing Harm: Research on the Mentally Ill" shed light on the mistreatment and exploitation of schizophrenia patients who have been subjected to relapse producing procedures in unethical experiments.

1999: Nine month-old Gage Stevens dies at Children's Hospital in Pittsburgh during participation in Propulsid clinical trial for infant acid reflux.

1999: 18-year-old Jesse Gelsinger dies after being injected with 37 trillion particles of adenovirus in gene therapy experiment at University of Pennsylvania.

1999: Director of National Institute of Mental Health suspends 29 clinical trials that failed to meet either ethical or scientific standards.

2000: University of Oklahoma melanoma trial halted for failure to follow government regulations and protocol.

2000: OPRR becomes Office of Human Research Protection ("OHRP") and made part of the Department of Health and Human Services.

2000: President Clinton implements the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act of 2000, which authorized compensation for thousands of Department of Energy workers who sacrificed their health in building the nation's nuclear defenses.

2000: The Washington Post (6 part) series, "Body Hunters" exposes unethical exploitation in experiments conducted by U.S. investigators in underdeveloped countries. Part 4 dealt with U.S. government funded, genetic experiments conducted by Harvard University in rural China.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26797-2000Dec19.html

2001: A biotech company in Pennsylvania asks the FDA for permission to conduct placebo trials on infants in Latin America born with serious lung disease though such tests would be illegal in U.S.

2001: Ellen Roche, a healthy 27-year old volunteer, dies in challenge study at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.

2001: April 4, Elaine Holden-Able, a healthy retired nurse, consumed a glass of orange juice that had been mixed with a dietary supplement for the sake of medical research. This Case Western University Alzheimer's experiment, financed by the tobacco industry, wound up killing her in what was called a ''tragic human error.'' Federal Office of Human Research Protections did not interview hospital staff, mostly accepted hospital's internal report, imposed no penalty, and closed the case and did not mention the death in its letter of determination. http://ohrp.osophs.dhhs.gov/detrm_letrs/nov01f.pdf

2001: Maryland Court of Appeals renders a landmark decision affirming "best interest of the individual child" as a standard for medical research involving children. The Court unequivocally prohibited nontherapeutic experimentation on children. (Higgins and Grimes v. Kennedy Krieger Institute).The case involved exposure of babies and small children to lead poisoning in EPA funded experiment. (http://www.courts.state.md.us/opinions/coa/2001/128a00.pdf)

 

 


Note:  A very sobering chronology of unethical human research -- at least such that was reported -- well worth contemplating -- especially now that even our federal agencies are pushing to do away with the 'informed consent' requirement as the only way to get 'data';  see, e.g.: 

**Medical Research Stakeholders Seek to Overturn Informed Consent Protections;  Part 3 of 4, at:  http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/928/9/

**Medical Research Stakeholders Seek to Overturn Informed Consent Protections;  Part 2 of 4, at:  http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/927/81/

**Another View Academics for Informed Consent, at:  http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/926/99/

**Medical Research Stakeholders Seek to Overturn Informed Consent Protection;  Part 1 of 4, at:  http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/925/81/

**OHRP Caves Under SUPPORT Pressure Re: oxygen experiment tiny premature babies, at:  http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/924/81/

Note especially the unethical research pre-World War II through 2001 -- all performed supposedly for 'beneficent, altruistic or 'national security' reasons, mostly by government agencies, esteemed academic medical facilities, prominent investigators, pharmaceutical companies -- mostly without 'informed consent' or the victims' knowledge, on vulnerable children, prisoners, the elderly, mentally ill and retarded, political and ethnic opponents, Third World populace, etc.  Given the current explosion of especially genetic and genetic engineering research -- and the concomitant explosion of scientific fraud and unethical experiments -- all need to be aware of these very disturbing precedents.  'Data' at any cost.  'Bioethics' would approve most of this as being 'for the greater good'.  However, there are other 'ethics' insisting that 'the ends never justify the means'.  See especially 1974, above.  Please read carefully, all the way through to the end.  I bet you won't be able to.  Note:  'VA' used above usually refers to 'Veterans Administration'.  . -- DNI]



Just-Discovered Letter Shows Margaret Sanger Was Part of Euthanasia Society

by Carole Novielli

 

In 1938, just a few years prior to the American Birth Control League (ABCL) changing its name to Planned Parenthood, which today is the largest abortion provider in the nation, a group of American Eugenics Society Members and members of Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League (ABCL) formed the National Society for the Legalization of Euthanasia.

One Source here

Heading this pro-euthanasia panel was a man by the name of Charles F. Potter who, in 1938 was also on the ABCL Committee for Planned Parenthood according to a February 1938, New York Times story.

Also on this board was Sidney Goldstein who sat on the American Birth Control League's National Council and later was on Planned Parenthood's Board of Directors.

Another member was Frank H. Hankins who was a managing editor for Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger's newsletter called the Birth Control Review. Hankins was also an American Eugenics Society member.
Another more famous name who was sat on the advisory board of this panel was Julian Huxley, who was a recipient of a Planned Parenthood award.
Mrs. F. Robertson Jones was also on this panel, she was an ABCL President, wrote for Sanger's Birth Control Review, and was an honorary board member of Planned Parenthood-World Population and a Board of Director of Planned Parenthood.

ABCL Citizen's Committee for Planned Parenthood member, Dr. Foster Kennedy, was also on the panel.

American Eugenics Society Member, Clarence Cook Little was the President of Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League (ABCL), at the same time he was on this pro-euthanasia panel.

Clarence Little was the president of the University of Michigan, a founding member of The American Eugenics Society, and a board member of the American Birth Control League which would later be known as Planned Parenthood. (Watch Maafa21)

American Eugenics Society founder and friend to Margaret Sanger, Leon Whitney, also sat on this panel. Whitney advocated forced sterilization, was published in Sanger' Birth Control Review, and openly praised Adolf Hitler for his Nazi effort.

MARGARET SANGER AND EUTHANASIA

It is unclear why Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger was not listed on the above article because Sanger was clearly involved in the Euthanasia Society. Sanger was a member of the American Eugenics Society and many of their members were on this panel. Sanger admitted that she gave a speech to the Klu Klu Klan and in her autobiography, she bragged that she received a dozen invites from the Klan for further speeches. By 1952, Margaret Sanger was open about her belief in Euthanasia.

This 1952 letter from the Euthanasia Society of America clearly shows Margret Sanger on the American Advisory Board of the Euthanasia Society of America

In addition to Margaret Sanger who founded Planned Parenthood the panel also shows Henry P. Fairchild a past president of the American Eugenics Society, a VP of Planned Parenthood;
See here where Sanger is listed as Honorary Chairman of Planned Parenthood in their early years:
Also listed is Harry Emerson Fosdick, who was a recipient of the Albert Lasker Awards Given by Planned Parenthood in 1953.  Henry H. Goddard is also listed and he was published in Margaret Sanger's book, The Case for Birth Control.

Also on the list is Samuel H Holmes. According to the film, Maafa21, in a 1929 speech, American eugenicist Samuel Holmes had proposed that mandatory birth control should be used as a tool to eliminate what he called the menace to the white race that had been created by increases in black population. His solution was to have a quota system in which the right to have a child would be controlled by the government and determined by race. At the time, Holmes was on the National Council of the American Birth Control League which would later become known as Planned Parenthood.

Frank L, Babbott is listed as a Vice President of this Euthanasia Society. Babbott was a founding member of the American Eugenics Society.

Frank H. Hankins  is listed on the Board of Director his associations are listed above.

Clarence C . Little is also listed on the board of directors. Clarence Little was the president of the University of Michigan, a founding member of The American Eugenics Society, and a board member of the American Birth Control League which would later be known as Planned Parenthood. He was President of the International Fed of Birth Control League, Birth Control Federation President, on the Birth Control review editorial board, A Birth Control Federation of America VP, and on the 1938 Citizen Committee for Planned Parenthood. Among other known Sanger associations.

Charles Francis Potter was founder of the Humanist Society and in 1924 Margaret Sanger wrote an Introduction for Charles Francis Potter. Potter was active in the Rhode Island Maternal Health Association, which he served as medical director, as well as Planned Parenthood. He was a member of the American, Rhode Island, and Providence medical societies.

In 1967, Dr. Potter was awarded the Margaret Sanger Medal by Planned Parenthood for outstanding service to family planning, after he served 11 years as medical director of its clinic.

President of the Euthanasia Society was Mrs. F Robertson Jones who was also on Margaret Sanger's ABCL board.  We would later discover that RL Dickinson was President of the Euthanasia Society and Senior VP of Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

In 2012 PETER GOODWIN, MD ended his life in accordance with Oregon's Measure 16 'Death with Dignity Act,' the landmark legislation that he helped craft and champion into law in 1997.  Aside from publicly advocating for Measure 16, he served as chairman of the Oregon Death with Dignity Committee. He was also a member of the Planned Parenthood of Columbia/Willamette board.

In 1964, Evelyn Ames co-founded the Planned Parenthood Association of Nashville. She served as the organization's southeastern representative for nine southern states, and on the executive committee of the national board of directors of Planned Parenthood-World Population. She was also a founder and member of the board of the Nashville chapter of Concern for Dying, an advocacy group for the right to die. Ames Davis died in 1993.

Esther Instebo delivered donations and filled fundraiser tables for Planned Parenthood and Washington politicians. Instebo pulled her friends into Democratic Party politics. Instebo worked with the euthanasia organization Compassion & Choices to qualify for help in dying under the state's Death with Dignity law. Knowing that she had that option greatly improved the quality of the last six months of her life because she knew she wouldn't have to put up with what she was afraid of.

According to researcher, Rita Dillar, when Compassion & Choices, formerly The Hemlock Society, convened its June 2012 conference, former Planned Parenthood insider Theresa Connor was a featured speaker. She was public policy director for Planned Parenthood in Washington state for 15 years and instituted the research and strategy behind the 2001 Erickson v. Bartell case that required employers/ insurance plans to cover prescription birth control under anti-discrimination laws.

It is interesting how Margaret Sanger, founded in Eugenics, the American Eugenics Society, and members of the Planned Parenthood all helped establish euthanasia and so-called mercy-killing ideologies in America. The purveyors of death have taken their fanaticism all the way from conception to end of life and no one is outside their bloody grips.



{British royal family physician Dr. Horder oversaw the entire Nazi medical program, and was president of the British Eugenics Society from 1935 - 1950s, and president of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society.  The U.S. branch was called the American Eugenics Society.  In 1938 a group of American Eugenics Society Members and members of Margaret Sanger's American Birth Control League (ABCL) formed the National Society for the Legalization of Euthanasiahttp://www.lifenews.com/2014/04/02/just-discovered-letter-shows-margaret-sanger-was-part-of-euthanasia-society/.  In 1952 the American Eugenics Society merged with the Rockefeller Population Council.  This Eugenics/Population Council awarded a grant in 1968 to Daniel Callahan (with ex-Communist behavioral psychiatrist Willard Gaylin) to found the first bioethics Hastings Center in 1969Callahan worked also with the Population Council, and was on the board of directors of the American Eugenics Society from 1987 - 1993.  Leading bioethics fellows included Peter Singer, and Ezekiel Emanuel (Obama's administration)

A major funder of the new bioethics Hastings Center was Monsanto   [http://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/topic/excellence_in_philanthropy/philanthropys_brave_new_world].  Another organization birthed out of the American Eugenics Society was Planned Parenthood, headed by William Gates, father of Bill Gates. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation currently funds the use of midwives in Indonesia to improve access to family planning.  [http://www.impatientoptimists.org/Posts/2014/01/Midwives-Critical-Players-in-Delivering-Family-Planning-in-Indonesia],  as do WHO, UNFPA, UNICEF, and the World Bank  [http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9241545879_eng.pdf] -- and the Population Council  [http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/population-control-advocates-plan-to-expand-abortion-through-midwives].  The Population Council works hard to provide 'safe abortions' around the globe  [http://www.popcouncil.org/research/safe-abortion-and-postabortion-care].

The Gates Foundation has also long been involved in vaccines, pharmaceuticals, GMOs, reproductive control, weather manipulation, global warming, etc.  Bill Gates, purchased 500,000 shares in Monsanto back in 2010 valued at more than $23 million, now has a direct interest in seeing Monsanto succeed in spreading GMOs around the world  [http://www.naturalnews.com/035105_Bill_Gates_Monsanto_eugenics.html].  More recently Monsanto is partnering with various synthetic biology pharma organizations   [http://www.marketwatch.com/story/cellectis-compact-talentm-the-next-generation-of-tal-effector-nucleases-2013-05-21 - DNI}

LifeNews Note: Carole Novielli is the author of the blog Saynsumthn, where this article originally appeared.








A Duty to Die

by Phill Kline

The perfect storm in support of the Culture of Death has arrived. Consumerism, self-indulgence, the worship of government, stardom and economic crisis is poised to transform the Shining City on the Hill into a death camp. The nation founded on the principle that all human life has value ordained by God is adopting a utilitarian view of life that casts aside the voiceless, defenseless, broken, disabled, diseased, unborn and elderly. The Land of Plenty is fast becoming a land where government shall ration its plenty only to those who it perceives add value, creating a duty to die for those who government perceives lessen value. We are losing our way.

The Culture of Death - (a) A health care bill introduced by House Democrats forces the elderly to attend consults regarding the withholding of food and water for the chronically ill; and (b) President Obama and the Democrat congressional leadership is attempting to force all Americans to pay for abortions and all hospitals to provide abortions.

Abortion has always claimed "choice" and "liberty" as its driving value. The same with Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. Yet, at its core, both are about a belief that there is not enough compassion, not enough love, not enough money, not enough life to share. We do not want to face those who by their condition awaken our conscience to our duty to provide for such needs. We'd rather they die.

The most common reason for an abortion is fear of the impact a child will have on the future of the mother, father or parents of the mother. The top reason for assisted suicide is fear of becoming a burden on another.

Abortion is not about the "life" of the mother, nor is assisted suicide about eliminating physical pain as both concerns can be addressed without loss of life.. Rather, euthanasia and abortion are about America's increasing fear that bears the fruit of stinginess through lack of faith.

We are becoming a self-indulgent culture demanding immediate answers to life's intractable problems and thanks to an obsessive media focus, casting our hopes and eyes constantly towards government for answers. This is why government is constantly growing, regardless of which political party holds the keys - both parties have learned that promoting false solutions through government action appeals to America's demands for answers. Government plies our fears, creating false hope and doing so by our political wannabes warrants TV time with the talking heads resulting in Stardom. In government, you do not generate power by depowering government.

Government already dictates much in the medical industry. Medicare and Medicaid are now the largest player in the health care market providing 46 cents of every health care dollar spent in America. Private insurance provides 42 cents of every dollar and the remaining 12 cents comes from consumers through out-of-pocket expenditures.

Markets are intelligent - they know where their money comes from! As a result, as government has increased its play in the market - those who earn in the health care market have turned their eyes on government. Increasingly, physicians, medical manufacturers and hospitals have moved away from protecting free market principles and moved towards demanding more from government.

Professional associations representing these groups have demanded increased government payouts for various procedures and services. Increasingly, they have become employees of government - not directly responsive to patient needs or demands. And put simply, they want a pay raise.

Politicians recognize the political truism that you gain a more loyal following by passing out dollar bills than allowing people to keep their own money: dependency is a great source of power. Honoring this truism grows government - creating ever more powerful constituencies that protect every government dollar spent.

The loss of these constituencies commitment to free market principles has been devasting and increasingly resulted in physician decisions being dictated by government formularies - government reimbursement pay formulas for certain medical services and equipment. These pay formulas are the new values driving decisions in medical care. And now, the primary articulator of these values - government - is ready to pomote a claim of value in death.

A child that is unwanted and uneeded - is simply a burden. Abort it! The elderly - more of a drain than a benefit - encourage physician assisted suicide.

The President's new health care bill will mandate your participation in abortion. And a new "reform" bill introduced in the US House by Representatives John Dingell (D-Michigan) and Charlie Rangel (D-New York) creates government mandated death consultants who will encourage the elderly and disabled to choose death.

In 1985, withholding fluid and nutrition from a patient unable to feed himself or herself was considered criminal. Afterall, we are unable to feed ourselves at numerous stages of life and if we were not in the process of dying, someone wihtholding fluids and food was denying what was considered humane care.

Such care is not medical treatment it is an act of compassion. Yet, with high profile court cases in numerous states and the trend towards death and a rationing of care - in 1986, the American Medical Association for the first time defined the provision of food and water as "medical treatment." The impact is monumental. Medical treatment can be withheld, humane care cannot.

Death by dehydration is brutal and lengthy.  It is accomplished with dozens of people standing by who, with simple effort, can sustain a life they watch wither, suffer and die.

And now in the Dingell/Rangel bill, the government will get into the act. Under Subtitle C - "Miscellaneous Improvements" beginning on page 420 of the 1,018 page bill, the government would mandate under Section 1233 what it terms "Advance Care Planning Consultation."

The consultation requires reviewing with all medicare patients the options of withholding care, including providing information on "the use of artificially administered nutrients and hydration."

There is not a need to educate patients about the need of hydration and nutrients. All of us have lived with that need all of our lives. We obtain it - or we die. This provision is there to encourage a pre-determination of death by neglect in order to, as the bill's title suggests, "provide affordable health care."

The proposed law takes the next step and requires these death consultations when a patient and family are most vulnerable. The consultations are to take place "if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual, including the diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease."

This sets up the dynamic for withholding food and water due to non-life threatening conditions. Further, it invites a patient, if conversant, to make a decision about their future during an ultimate time of stress.

This language invites an approach similar to Oregon's assisted suicide legislation, which was sold as a "compassionate" way out for those terminally ill and in constant pain. This was and is a lie.

Studies indicate that none of the 43 who were assisted in their suicides during the first two years of that legislation were facing such problems. The overwhelming concern was being a burden on family and requiring assistance in daily living.

Just as abortion plays on the fears of frightened mothers, euthanasia plays on the fears of frightened seniors and the disabled.

Further, the bill establishes a special government study called the "physician's quality reporting initiative" which will create special government funded "patient decision aids" and government consultation groups to assist paitents in understanding these issues.

These committees will represent different disciplines but with one commonality - all will be paid by government. And government is interested in saving "costs."

The only thing that breaks this cycle is principled leadership or Americans demanding principled action. Americans, however, are increasingly being taught that liberty is a frightening concept - it requires initiative and exists in a state of uncertainty. Today, there is the ever-present temptation to trade liberty for a false sense of security. This has happened with health care.

Health care is now government business and as with all those who pay the bill, government is attempting to cut costs and this means rationing - choosing one over the other. This is one of the main threads of the hidden debate on health care. Proponents of government making such choices are struggling to find the right Orwellian terms to confuse or mislead the American public.

At least Princeton University Professor Peter Singer, although confused, was blunt and direct in the July 19th edition of the NY Times Sunday Magazine. Professor Singer argues that such rationing is logical. Singer is right - it is. The crux, however, is who makes the choice of rationing and whose values are reflected in that decision. Singer and President Obama support government making these decisions.

Singer writes "(r)ationing health care means getting value for the billions we are spending by setting limits on which treatments should be paid for...." And Singer invites us to answer the following problem as an example: "saving the life of one teenager is equivalent to saving the lives of___ 85 year-olds."[ix] Or how about, preserving the quality of life of one adult is worth the lives of how many unborn? Or, saving the life of___ university professors is worth the life of___ unemployed steel workers? (Prof. Singer probably does not want to put that one up for a vote). You can see the problem.

Families make difficult choices of rationing every day - saving for college, purchasing a new and safer car, enhancing savings, moving to a new home, determining health care costs. Increasingly, government is making these decisions for us through the coercive impact of law or through tax code encouragement. This loss of liberty has profound implications. The government solution scheme incrementally replaces opportunity with government promises, diminishes personal accountability creating government inefficiencies and more ominously, invites government dictates in the cause of controlling costs.

And now President Obama is attempting to have government dictate abortion in the name of "choice." Soon, you government may be dictating the duty to die to the disabled, sick and elderly in the cause of universal health care.

Accordingly, the President and Democrat congressional leadership are trying to force through mandated health insurance coverage for abortion and the mandatory provision of abortion services for all Americans as well. All Americans will be forced into health insurance plans that include abortion coverage - forcing all Americans to pay for abortions through their premiums.

It is in these battles that we will define ourselves as a nation and a people.


{Phill Kline is the former Kansas Attorney General and now a visiting law professor in Virginia. His web site is http://www.standwithTruth.com - Ed.)