As I’ve been going through my spiritual journey for the past several years the most fascinating things in my life have been uncovered! I’ve realized that I’m a walking ‘Chosen One’ blessed by the heavens!
It seems many hid these gifts from me for most of my life! Knowing that something truly special was given to me at birth. The RH Negative Bloodline and the 3,6,9 Genetic Coding of Nikola Tesla!
Call me crazy; this is no coincidence, I was gifted with these two very special unique gifts which hold many spiritual capabilities not known to humankind. By which I’m working on them now learning new things each and every day!
People really have been living in dark and be lied too! There’s many ‘Higher Frequency’ gifted ‘Starseeds, Lightworkers, Indigo Children, Rainbow Children and RH Negative Spiritual beings; who are very gifted and talented. ‘Chosen Spiritual Beings’ are here too help evolve, support the universe, heal, support humanity and the earth.
Many spiritual leaders are: Psychic, Reiki Healers, Clairvoyants, Mediumship’s, Empath’s, Natural Holistic Healers, Energy Healers, Shaman’s and much more depending upon individual. Rh Negative blood types are unknown to man and science, RH Negative Blood types hold very special unique gifts and talents instilled within in them many will never be able to comprehend nor figure out, these gifts were given to them by higher source connected to the Holy Grail.
We all know ‘Nikola Tesla’ was very sought after by many for all his unique gifts, talents that were instilled within him. His inventions and abilities are still being spoke of today. What caught my intention was when I realized my birthday was the ‘Genetic Coding’ of Nikola Tesla’s 3,6,9 which opened my eye’s into another realm besides just having the ‘Royal RH Negative Bloodline!’
I’m in the process of putting all of this together right now, although I believe there’s a true reasoning behind all of this, and I plan to work to find out how all this came about in my life. I wanted to share my story so others can begin doing their own research about their lives; and stop depending on others to give them the answers that reside inside of them! I never knew about Nikola Tesla’s genetic coding 3,6,9 until decades later in my life, if I’d known maybe my life would of been different.
I now know and understand my connection between the two and my life going forward will be much different! As well how many others were born with these two ‘Powerful Encodings’ and not one person has ever pointed it out to them?
Hopefully the universe has stepped in like they have on my behalf and awakened many to who they truly are and what their capable of! It took me some time to realize I’m a humanitarian, a naturally born healer psychic and many gifts and talents.
Life is too short not to know who you truly are and what lies within only YOU!
Schering – Plough – Berlex – Bayer AG Mirena IUD – Bayer AG & Subsidiaries Corporate History – Lawsuits – Plaintiff Emails
Date: 02/23/2014
To: Bayer AG – Executive Members & Subsidiaries RE: Mirena – Bayer AG, Bayer Healthcare, Schering AG, Berlex Corporation, I.G. Farben Schering Plough – Founded in 1851, by Ernest Christian Friedrich Schering Company Formed: Schering AG – Germany
History: Following the entry of the United States into World War II in 1941. U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered Schering AG’s, U.S. Assets to be seized. The company was placed under Government administratorship until, 1952, by which all prior assets were sold to corporates his business and generated $254.5 million in sales by 1954. That figure doubled by 1962.
In 1971 Plough merged Plough Chemical Company Incorporated with Schering Corporation. The Schering corporation was a manufacturer of prescription pharmaceuticals, the merger name of the two corporations was named, Schering-Plough. Schering was able to gain entry back into the United State’s by merging with Plough in the pharmaceutical industry.
Release date from U.S. – 1941 to Re-entry date back into U.S. – 1971 Mr. Abe Plough, exhausted his full business ownership in his company and became chairman of the new merging corporation. Five years after the merger in 1976, Plough retired from his company he’d started in 1908. Schering – Plough remained in America, growing there corporation no back in the United States. By 2005 Schering-Plough had 1.4% market share in the United States., becoming 17th in the top 20 pharmaceutical corporations by sales compiled y IMS Health of America.
Schering-Plough was a full member of the “European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industry and Associations” (EFPIA). In November 2009, Schering-Plough merged with Merck & Company, or Merck KGAA in a reverse merger. Merck became a subsidiary of Schering-Plough. The two companies manufactured several pharmaceutical drugs, Claritin, and Clarinex, an anti-cholesterol drug Vytorin and a brain tumor drug Temodar.
Class-Action Lawsuit Filed Against Claritin’s Maker – 2003
Consumer groups have filed a class-action lawsuit against pharmaceutical giant Schering-Plough – http://product-liability.laws.com/claritin-lawsuit – The [agency] has reviewed these ads and concluded that they are misleading and violate the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and applicable regulations and should be discontinued immediately,” says the letter from Joan Hankin, JD, a consumer promotion analyst at the FDA.
The complaint, brought to a New Jersey state court, accuses the drug company of “deceptive advertising and overpricing” for Claritin, America’s most widely prescribed allergy drug.
Schering-Plough Settles Clarinex Class Action for $165 Million –
http://www.bigclassaction.com/settlement/schering-plough-settles-clarinex- class-action.php– 2010 Specifically, the suit alleged that between May 2000 and February 2001 Schering-Plough made false statements that did not adequately disclose “serious and widespread deficiencies” in its quality and manufacturing operations. This, in turn, risked delay of FDA approval of Clarinex, a successor drug to Claritin.
Vytorin Class Action Lawsuits Mount as Justice Department Investigates – See more at: http://www.aboutlawsuits.com/vytorin-class-action-lawsuits-mount-1636/#sthash.nl7O9PnQ.dpuf – 2008 Vytorin lawsuits have been filed against Merck and Schering-Plough involving consumer fraud actions for selling a medication which provides no benefits, cases alleging personal injuries caused by the drug and claims to establish medical monitoring for users who were given
the drug. Temodar Bone Marrow Injury & Birth Defects – http://www.rotlaw.com/temodar/ Two Temodar lawsuits were filed against the drug’s parent companies, regarding illicit marketing and sales practices. In 2006, Schering-Plough, the former Temodar manufacturer, faced a Department of Justice investigation which uncovered mis-marketing and illegal sales practices.
The Temodar lawsuit found that the company marketed Temodar for unapproved forms of brain cancer, bribed doctors and promoted the sale of its Temodar products. For these charges, the company was ultimately forced to pay $435 million fines. – See more at: http://product-liability.laws.com/temodar
Following the resolution of this Temodar lawsuit, the drug was purchased by Merck. In 2011, the Department of Justice issued a subpoena seeking materials concerning marketing of Temodar dosage products.
This Temodar lawsuit was issued as part of an investigation which could lead to a Temodar concerning marketing abuses committed by Schering-Plough. In the past, similar Temodar lawsuits have included a fund for victims of adverse effects as a condition of settlement. http://product-liability.laws.com/temodar-lawsuit
Summary: Schering-Plough 1971 – Merck & Company or Merck KGAA merger – 2009 Merck & Company – Schering Plough Schering Products: sugammadex, Cerazette, Desloratadines, Neoclarit, Esmeron, Famvir, Famcilovir, Intron A & PEG-Intron, Levitra, Livial, Marvelon, NuvaRing, Quazepam, Remeron, Buprenorphine, Zetia; OTC: Afrin, Coricidin, Coppertone, Dr. Scholl’s, Zinka, Bain de Soleil, PD-1 antibody.
Schering-Plough – Merck & Company Organon Research Analysis
2004 – Schering – Plough was accused of marketing gimmicks and payoffs to doctors for prescribing the company’s pharmaceutical products. At that time Schering entered into a consent decree with the FDA in 3/2002, from their manufacturing problems with Albuterol inhaler. Schering-Plough was ordered to pay $500 Million US dollars to the US Treasury. Bridon (sugammadex’s) – Rejected 3x by U.S. FDA – 2008 due to hypersensitivity reaction concerns to the drug. Clinical trial inconsistencies
Approved by the European Union – 2008 Sugammadex’s – PD-1 antibody, repoductive medicine, contraception, psychiatry, HRT, anesthesia, Diosynth, birth control pills, Marvelon, asenapine: some products acquired by purchase of Organon of Scotland
Organon Company Analysis: Orgination: Akzo Nobel: 1646 – Sweden-Denmark-1777- Organon: Human health business unit of Akzo Nobel – 80yrs.(Pharmaceutical industry) Founded: Dr. Saal van Zwanenberg in Oss, Netherlands – 1923 Zwanenberg-Organon – New House Research – Scotland, United Kingdom, Courtaulds Products – estrogens, insulin, cortisone, fibre Koninklijke Zawnenberg Organon (KZO) – Fiber company AKZO Base: New Jersery – Arnhem, Amsterdam Manufacturing: Netherlands, Germany, United Kingdom, Ireland, China, Japan, Americas. High-Tech coatings, artificial fibers, paint, chemicals, vetinary, 2007 Schering-Plough New Jersey, acquired Organon, 2009 Schering-Plough mergered with Merck and Company aka Merck Sharp & Dohme or MSD Schering-Plough, N.J. The American Drug Maker agrees to purchase Akzko Nobel’s Organon Biosciences Unit – valued @ 14.4Billion – 13.7x’s EBIT The merger astounded many investors, who were waiting for the announcement of a planned IPO offering of Organon, the maker of birth control pills, for about $10 billion. Azko Nobel world’s largest paint maker and coatings, chemicals – Amsterdam Akzo – Last European company with chemical and pharmaceutical 1895 – Akzo Nobel’s: Eka Chemicals Pulp and paper chemicals 1923 – Produced Insulin from pancreases of animals 1968- Courtaulds acquires international paints 1969 – Merger AKU – KZO = AKZO 1994 – Akzo Nobel industries merge Akzo Nobel 1998 Akzo acquires – Courtaulads 2007 – Akzo Nobel sells Organon Biosciences NV – New Jersey Schering – Plough
Research Analysis Organon – Akzo Nobel Analysis
CFO: Organon Biosciences N.V. – Arhem, Netherlands – Dr. Jorg Spiekerkotter – 2006 Prior: Schering AG executive board member responsible for Leader of Finance Administration and Human Resources – Also prior, Head of Legal Hoescht Schering Agrevo. Organon hire’s Dr. Spiekerkotter as CFO, U.S. Schering-Plough New Jersey purchases Organon a year later – 2007 Dr. Spiekerkotter CFO and board member of management leaves Organon Biosciences N.V., 2007. After the Schering-Plough purchase of Organon, Akzo Nobel, reduced pension liabilities, debt and paid for a share buy back of 1.3Million Organon Pharmaceutical Inconsistencies:
Akzo Nobel Feels the pinned as Organon contraceptive sales drop in 2002 The Organon units of Akzo Nobel NV faired poorer than competitor Schering AG reporting a two perecent a year – on – year decline in the use of the contraceptive pill in the Netherlands in the first half of 2002. Sales of third-generation pills recorded the worst fall, declining 13% over a review period. Sales of Organon’s third-generation pills Marvelon & Mercilon fell 19% and 21%, while Schering’s Femodeen fell 18%.
(AFX Report) Media – 2001 Alerts: Users of third-generation pills had 70% greater chance of developing thrombosis than users of second-generation pills. Dutch Foundation Pharmaceutical Statistics: Market leader Microgynon, Schering’s second generation pills, appears to have benefited from a drop in sales of third-generation pills – research published by the Dutch Foundation (SFK) indicates 13% increase in the first half of sales. In addition, third-generation pills are were losing ground to Schering’s “Yasmin,” a pill launched in the Netherlands 4/2001. Organon was battling negative news regarding Implanon – a contraceptive inserted under the skin. Women filed lawsuits, some claims stating they had fell pregnant while using the product, headaches, vein inflammation, bleeding and more lawsuit claims. http://www.nytimes.com/1999/08/27/us/maker-of-norplant-offers-a-settlement-in-suit-over-effects.html Maker of Norplant Offers a Settlement In Suit Over Effects (Plaintiff: Also participated in Norplant lawsuit and settlement) Norplant II developed by Population Council Schering (OY) & Norplant 1 by Wyeth Schering AG, Akzo Nobel’s Unit to end collaboration on Male Contraceptives – 2006 Schering AG and Akzo Nobel’s Organon unit will terminate a research collaboration into male fertility control at the end of Phase II clinical trial, which was designed to test a combination of two hormones known to suppress sperm production.
Bayer – Berlex Research Analysis
Schering AG – Dates back to Chemische Fabrik auf Actien – Chemicals operations 1930’s – Company diversified for Schering AG 1876 – Schering Glatz – Medicine distribution company launched – 1929 dissolved 1929 – Established Schering Corporation hormone research and synthesize steroid drugs based in New York Formed Berlex Corporation in 1979 after acquiring assets of the Internal Medicine division of Cooper Laboratories, New Jersey
Area’s – Cardiovascular disease, birth control, diagnostic imaging, endocrinology 1980’s: Iodinated contrast agents used in imaging launched in U.S. 1982: Oral contraceptives, Leveln and Tri-Leveln, Magnevist launched Schering- Plough sued Schering AG, claiming Berlex infringed upon it’s trademark Results: Schering AG agreed to use the Schering name in the U.S., and Canada in connection with its pharmaceutical products, relying on the Berlex trademark. Triton and Codon U.S. Corporation consolidation and purchase to form Berlex Biosciences of California – prior Ortho Research Center – built by Ortho Division of Chevron Chemical Company – Purchased @ $53million Schering acquired Shell Oil biotech portion 1990 – Fludura, Betaseron Schering acquires in 1993 – Chevron Chemical Company Co-Partnership: Abbott Laboratories to sell Magnevist and Ultravist Berlex Products: Fludara, Betaseron, Climara, Feridex I.V., Berlex acquired by Bayer AG Berlex Lawsuits – Magnevist, Fludara, Betaseron http://www.drug-injury.com/drug_injury/magnevist/ FDA Panel Suggests Bayer, GE MRI Drugs Be Restricted
In the case of Ben Venue Laboratories, the shut-down of its Ohio manufacturing plant has resulted in the recall of the Fludara leukemia drug, as well as shortages of vital medications, including the life-saving cancer drugs, methotrexate and Doxil. Betaseron – BigClassAction.com: Class Action News … http://www.bigclassaction.com/lawsuit/betaseron.php – Berlex, Inc., the manufacturer of the medication, recently contacted healthcare professionals to remind them about certain aspects of the prescribing information for Betaseron as it relates to liver toxicity.
Bayer AG – Berlex – Schering Research & Analysis
Berlex 1999 launched – Acutect and Neotect lmaging products 2000 – Berlex Products launched – Levulan Kerstick used to treat keratoses Betapace AF – replacement for Betapace and generic sotalol Campath, Refludan, Finevin, Mirena – Iud, Yasmin, Leukine, Finacea Berlex marketed some 20 products such as oral contraceptives called Yasmin, and Mirena, a implanted contraceptive and medicines to treat multiple sclerosis, dermatology disorders and cancers Berlex contributed $1.2 billion in annual sales, which was one-quarter of it’s parent corporation Schering AG total revenue’s.
Bayer Bayer AG- Founded Friedrich Bayer & Johann Freidrich Weskott – 1863 1 st Product – acetylsalicylic acid (Aspirin) discovered by French Chemist Charles Frederic Gernhardt in 1853 1899 Bayer trademark of Aspirin was registered After World War I U.S. confiscation of assets – Lost Trademark status in U.S., UK, France – Trademark name currently registered in 80 countries under Bayer AG 1904 – Established Bayer Cross logo only for doctors and pharmacists Bayer’s U.S., confiscated assets acquired by U.S. Sterling Drug aka Sterling Winthrop Bayer became a subsidiary of IG Farben, German Chemical company conglomerate World War II IG Farben known for using slave labor in factories attached to concentration camps Mauthausen-Gusen, concentration camps with 42.5% ownership IG Farben produced Zyklon B – Chemical used in gas chamber of Auschwitz After World War II IG Farben – Bayer separated into individual corporations IG Farben ordered closed by Soviet Union for war reparations although, known for currently trading on Germany stock exchange
Bayer AG – Berlex – Schering Research and Analysis
Bayer AG Executive Fritz ter Meer, was sentenced to 7yrs. In prison by the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, when released he was appointed on the supervisory board of Bayer AG in 1956 – On the facts proven on record, the defendants who were members of the [managing board of I.G.] were accessories to and took a consenting part in the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity as alleged in count three of indictments.
1978 – Bayer purchases – Miles laboratories and subsidiaries, Miles Canada, Cutter Laboratories – Products: Alka Seltzer, Flinstone Vitamins, One-A-Day vitimans, and Cutter insect, repellant
1994 – Bayer purchase Sterling Winthrop’s – OTC portion from SmithKline Beachman aka – Galxo Smith Kline – Enabling Bayer to acquire U.S., Canadian trademark rights to Bayer and Bayer Cross, as well as Aspirin trademark in Canada, that was previously confiscated.
Bayer AG reorganized into a Holding Company in 2003 – Core businesses were transformed into limited companies, controlled by Bayer AG Bayer CropScience AG, Bayer Healthcare, Bayer Material Science, Bayer Chemicals AG, Bayer Business Services GmbH, and Bayer Industry Services GmbH & Co. OHG, Bayer shares: Frankfurt Stock Exchange, London Stock Exchange, N.Y. Stock Exchange Bayers 2004 Chemical reorganization – Formed Lanxess excluding H.S. Starack and Wolff Walsrode – polymers – Lanxess listed on Frankfort Stock Exchange – 2005 2004 – Bayer Healthcare AG – Acquired OTC Pharmaceutica divison of Roche Pharmaceutical 2006 – Merck Kga $14.6 billion dollar take over Schering AG surpassed Bayer $19.5 bid 2007 – Bayer Healthcare Diagnostic Division acquires Siemens Medical Solutions 2008 – Bayer Healthcare acquires OTC U.S. Company Sagmel, Inc – which distributed to most of common wealth countries, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Belarus etc., Currently holding subsidiaries all over the world – Bayer’s holding company located in Germany Bayer specialty area’s: Bayer Healthcare – Pharmaceutical and medical product sub-group – Bayer Healthcare 4 divisions – Bayer Consumer Care, Bayer Animal Health, Bayer Medical Care, Bayer Schering Pharma 2007 Bayer Pharma took over Schering AG – Berlex and formed “Bayer Schering Pharma,” the largest take over in Bayer’s history. Named changed to Bayer Pharma in 2011.
Bayer AG – Berlex – Schering Research and Analysis
Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals is divided into two business units = General Medicine and Specialty Medicine. Women’s healthcare is example of General Medicine business unit.
Bayer’s Pharma unit produces birth control pills Yaz and Yasmin. Both pills use a newer type of progesterone a hormone called drospirenone in combination of estrogen. (How many times had these products been passed through multiple mergers?) Yaz was advertised as a treatment for premenstrual dysphroic disorder (PMDD), and moderate acne. Bayer also picked up Nexavar and Betaferon/Betaseron, and blood clotting drug, Kogenate, (Many of these drugs were passed down by several prior German corporations) 2009 – U.S. Adrea, entered a global agreement with Bayer Healthcare AG, a subsidiary of Bayer AG. Where Bayer was in control of the completion of the ongoing phase I and phase II studies of RDEA119, which Bayer would be responsible for the further development and commercialization of RDEA119 and any of Adrea’s other MEK inhibitors.
*United States Adrea Biosciences, was acquired by AstraZeneca in 2012 a biotechnology company AstraZeneca – Formed in 1913 in Sodertalje, Sweden by 400 doctors and apothercaries formed Astra AB. In 1993 British chemicals ICI consolidated it’s pharmaceutical business and its agrochemicals, specialty businesses, to form, The Zeneca Group plc.
1999 – Astra and Zeneca Group merged pharmaceutical companies to form AstraZeneca plc – U.S Headquarters in Wilmington, Delaware Astra AB – British multinational pharmaceutical company based in U.K. Products by Bayer AG and multiple subsidiaries: Women reproductive, Aspirin, analgesic, antipyretic, anticoagulant medicine, Prontosil, Levitra, Herion (diacetylmorphine) formerly sold as cough treatment, Sulonamide, Ciprofloxacin, Polyurethane, Polycarbonate, CD’s, Makrolon, Suramin-Parathion, Insecticide Propoxur, Primodos – hormone pregnancy test
BAYER’S SPECIALTY AREA’S
Bayer Specialty Medicine business unit – Diagnostic Imaging Contrast agents from his unit helps play crucial role in precise early diagnosis – Computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound The Pet tracer Florbetaben, in Bayer’s pipeline is to recognize beta Amyloid, on of the pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease. Bayer Consumer Care – Manages Bayer’s OTC medicine portfolio – Key products include, Aspirin, Aleve, food supplements, Redoxon, and Berocca, and skin products Bepanthen and Bepanthol. Bayer Diabetes Care – Manages Bayer’s medical device portfolio, Key products; Mirena Iud, Blood glucose monitors, Contour Next EZ (XT), Contour USB, Breeze 2 Bayer Material Science: High-Tech Polymers, and develops solutions for a broad range of application relevant to everyday life Bayer Business Services: Technology infrastructure and technical support, portion of Bayer USA and Bayer Canada – Bayer AG USA
Headquarters of North America Service Desk, and the Central IT Help Desk – Located in Robinson Township, Pennsylvania
Bayer Technology Services: Plant engineering, construction, optimization. Currenta; offers services for the chemical industry, including utility supply, waste management, infrastructure, safety, security, analytic and vocational training 1904: Founded sports club, “Turn-und-Spielverein der Farbenfabriken vorm. Friedr. Bayer & Co., later SV Bayer 04, TSV Bayer 04 Levekusen, 1984 Bayer 04 Leverkusen 2014: Bayer, Novartis, Reckitt eye $10B-$12B bids for Merck consumer unit
Bayer AG -Berlex aka Schering Lawsuit Research & Analysis
A cite from http://www.haemophilia-litigation.com/, access date 31 May 2006: “After 1978, there were four major companies in the United States engaged in the manufacture, production and sale of Factor VIII and IX: Armour Pharmaceutical Company, Bayer Corporation and its Cutter Biological division, Baxter Healthcare and its Hyland Pharmaceutical division and Alpha Therapeutic Corporation, which have been or are defendants in certain lawsuits.
The plaintiffs allege that the companies manufactured and sold blood factor products as beneficial “medicines” that were, in fact of likely to be contaminated with HIV and/or HCV. This resulted in the mass infection and/or deaths of thousands of haemophiliac worldwide Baycor – After 52 deaths were blamed on an alleged side effect of Bayer’s anticholesterol drug Baycol, its manufacture and sale were discontinued in 2001. The side effect was rhabdomyolysis, causingrenal failure, which occurred with a tenfold greater frequency in patients treated with Baycol in comparison to those prescribed alternate medications of the statin class Medicaid reimbursement
In January 2001, Bayer agreed to pay $14 million to the United States and 45 states to settle allegations under the federal False Claims Act that the company caused physicians and other health care providers to submit fraudulently inflated reimbursement claims to Medicaid Methyl parathion poisoning case – In October 2001, Bayer was taken to court after 24 children in the remote Andean village of Tauccamarca, Peru were killed and 18 severely poisoned when they drank a powdered milk substitute contaminated with the insecticide methyl parathion.
A Peruvian Congressional Subcommittee found significant evidence of criminal responsibility by Bayer and the Peruvian Ministry of Agriculture Liberty Link rice – In August 2006, it became apparent that the United States rice crop had been contaminated with unapproved genetically engineered Bayer CropScience rice. The genetically engineered rice has an herbicide-resistance trait. These forms of rice are commonly referred to among US rice growers as “Liberty Link rice 601” or “LL 601”. Approximately 100 varieties of rice are produced primarily in Arkansas, Texas,Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and California.
Bayer AG -Berlex aka Schering Lawsuit Research
2006 Trasylol safety advisory – In September 2006, Bayer was faulted by the FDA for not revealing during testimony the existence of a commissioned retrospective study of 67,000 patients, 30,000 of whom received Trasylol and the rest other antifibrinolytics. The study concluded Trasylol carried greater risks.
The FDA was alerted to the study by one of the researchers involved. Although the FDA issued a statement of concern, they did not change their recommendation that the drug may benefit certain patients. In a Public Health Advisory Update dated 3 October 2006, the FDA recommended “physicians consider limiting Trasylol use to those situations in which the clinical benefit of reduced blood loss is necessary to medical management and outweighs the potential risks” and carefully monitor patients.The FDA took Trasylol off the market on 5 November 2007.
Prostate cancer claims – In October 2009, the Center for Science in the Public Interest sued Bayer for “falsely claiming that the selenium in Men’s One-A-Day multivitamins might reduce the risk of prostate cancer
Yasmin / Yaz birth control pills – The FDA has repeatedly warned and punished Bayer for misstating the benefits of Yasmin (also known as Yaz) while understating its risks. In 2011, the FDA’s panel of experts voted 21-5 that the labeling on Yaz was inadequate and needed more information about the potential risk of blood clots in the legs and lungs. The former president of the Australian Medical Associationwas nearly killed by a blood clot that resulted from taking the pill.
The pill has been linked to 23 deaths in Canada. In April 2012, the FDA ordered Bayer to change its U.S. labeling to reference the increased risk for blood clots Neonicotinoid pesticides Clothianidin
In December 2010, a leaked memo from the EPA’s Environmental Fate and Effects Division asserted “Clothianidin’s (Bayer’s neonicotinoid pesticide) major risk concern is to non-target insects (that is, honey bees). Exposure through contaminated pollen and nectar and potential toxic effects therefore remain an uncertainty for pollinators.
“In January 2011,Avaaz.org launched an online petition to ban neonicotinoid pesticides Imidacloprid French and Nova Scotian beekeepers claim Bayer’s seed treatment midacloprid kills honeybees. France has since issued a provisional ban on the use of imidacloprid for corn seed treatment pending further action. A consortium of U.S. beekeepers filed a civil suit against Bayer CropScience for alleged losses.
Bayer AG -Berlex aka Schering Lawsuit Research and Analysis
Europe restrictions & challenge The European Commission has restricted the use of both of Bayer’s neonicotinoids. Bayer is challenging the restrictions.
Nexavar claims In an interview given to the Businessweek following controversies surrounding the Indian government’s decision to award a compulsory license to Indian company Natco Pharma Ltd. for Naxavar (Sorafenib), Bayer CEO Marijn Dekkers equated the compulsory license with theft. Regarding targeted markets, he said, “Is this going to have a big effect on our business model? No, because we did not develop this product for the Indian market, let’s be honest. We developed this product for Western patients who can afford this product, quite honestly. It is an expensive product, being an oncology product.”
Chemical Spills: In 28 August 2008, an explosion occurred at the Bayer CropScience facility at Institute,West Virginia. A runaway reaction ruptured a tank and the resulting explosion killed two employees. The ruptured tank was close to a methyl isocyanate tank which was undamaged by the explosion
Primodos victims from UK demand apology – Cologne, Germany – 26th April 2013 Bayer Shareholder Meeting – Speech Valerie Williams Lipobay/Baycol Victim Goes To Court – Argentina: BAYER Sentenced To Pay Compensation – http://www.cbgnetwork.org/4649.html
10/2013
Bayer AG -Berlex aka Schering Lawsuit Research Analysis
State ignored plan for tougher chemical oversight – West Virginia ignores a plan for tougher chemical oversight which was worked out after an explosion in BAYER ́s Institute plant (more info). 300,000 residents are still without usable water after a chemical spill – 1/2014 http://www.cbgnetwork.org/5405.html
11/2004 Has died / Hemophiliacs infected by Bayer products – 8/2012 http://www.cbgnetwork.org/4607.html Bayer, Baxter pay multimillion indemnity to haemophiliacs – http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3678.html – Settlement in the US with victims from 22 countries / HIV infections were preventable / “why is BAYER concealing the payments? 1/2010
Bayer AG -Berlex aka Schering Lawsuit Research & Analysis
$300 Million Compensation in the US Settlements in Yaz litigation continue, mediator is “cautiously optimistic” that end is in sight – http://www.cbgnetwork.org/4512.html
4/2011 – Complete Study “Risk of venous thromboembolism in users of oral contraceptives containing drospirenone” (DownloadBMJ_Study_Drospirenone.pdf) and the study on US data Yaz victims to appear in Bayer shareholder meeting Ban demanded / Coalition introduces countermotions / more than 50 deaths in the US – http://www.cbgnetwork.org/3327.html
10/07 Risk of thromboembolism in women taking ethinylestradiol/drospirenone and other oral contraceptives. – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed? Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17766604&ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPa
09/2007 Safety of a new oral contraceptive containing drospirenone. – http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed? Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=15471507&ordinalpos=8&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPa
Bayer AG -Berlex aka Schering Lawsuit Research and Analysis
IG Farben – Bayer AG IG Farben to be dissolved -The company’s shares continue to trade on the German stock exchange even thought it went into liquidation in 1952. IG Farben has been heavily criticized for not paying any compensation to former Nazi slave laborers after hundreds of Germany’s leading industrial companies contributed to a 10bn Deutschmark fund this year. Germany’s IG Farben, the company that made the Zyklon-B gas used in the Nazi death camps, has announced it will be dissolved by 2003? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1549092.stm
In year 1928, the American holdings of IG Farben, namely, the American branches of Bayer Company, General Aniline Works, Agfa Ansco, and Winthrop Chemical Company, were organized into a Swiss holding company, which was christened Internationale Gesellschaft für Chemische Unternehmungen AG or IG Chemie, in short. The controlling interest of this entity rested with IG Farben in Germany. In the following year, 1929, just a decade before the outbreak of the Second World War, these American firms merged to become American IG Chemical Corporation, or American IG, later renamed General Aniline & Film. – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_IG
In 1952, IG Farben was split into BASF, Bayer, an Hoechst again. German chemical companies —Badische Anilin- und Sodafabrik Ludwigshafen (BASF), Bayer, Agfa, Hoechst,Weiler-ter-Meer, and Griesheim-Elektron. These six companies were merged intoInteressen-Gemeinschaft Farbenindustrie AG or, IG Farben, for short.
Bayer AG -Berlex aka Schering Lawsuit Research and Analysis
Bayer IUD Litigation Consolidated in New York – http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202597081274? slreturn=20140124033833 4/2013 Bayer Cipro Drug Litigation Settlement – ttp://classactionsnews.com/settlements/bayer-cipro-drug-litigation-settlement 3/2014
Is it possible many women received fake faulty IUD’s?
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is seeking your help in communicating an important woman’s health safety message to your members. We hope you will share this information with your members to ensure that they are obtaining and using only FDA-approved products.
The FDA has become aware of the purchase, use, and distribution of unapproved intrauterine devices (IUD) and intrauterine systems (IUS) by some medical practices throughout the United States. The violative products include unapproved versions of FDA-approved products such as Mirena, Implanon, Copper-T, and ParaGard; as well as products not approved for use in the United States, such as T-Safe. The FDA’s major concerns with the use of unapproved IUD/IUS’s are (1) the potential lack of safety and efficacy, and especially the risk of reduced efficacy for preventing pregnancy; (2) the negative public health impact from the import and use of unapproved IUD/IUS’s that can be from unknown sources or foreign locations, and may not have been manufactured, transported or stored under conditions required as part of the FDA approval process; and (3) the use of and subsequent billing for unapproved medical products, which raises the possibility of insurance fraud, particularly Medicaid fraud.
To reduce the chance of receiving an unapproved or adulterated medical product, your internet purchases should be made from state-licensed distributors or pharmacies located in the U.S. Health care providers should be aware that purchasing medical products from web sites that are outside of the U.S. may be illegal and may increase the risk of receiving a potentially harmful product, since many web sites sell products that are not FDA-approved and could be manufactured in other countries. These products may or may not have been approved by regulatory agencies in other countries or may be counterfeit.
For example, FDA is aware of several web sites that appear to be Canadian web sites but ship products from countries other than Canada. For this reason, the Agency does not recommend inserting IUD/IUS’s furnished by a patient who may have purchased the product on the internet, without first properly verifying that it is an FDA-approved product that was purchased from a licensed pharmaceutical or device supplier in the U.S. Federal law requires that IUD/IUS’s be FDA-approved prior to marketing. This law is designed to protect patients from products that are unsafe and ineffective.
The recent issue with patients in Rhode Island unknowingly receiving imported, unapproved IUD/IUS’s highlights the unacceptable risk patients may be exposed to when a product’s identity, purity, source, handling, and storage cannot be verified. Health care providers should be reassured, however, that FDA- approved IUD/IUS’s have gone through rigorous testing and review for safety and efficacy, and must meet specified storage and manufacturing practices.
Providers can continue to use these FDA-approved IUD/IUS’s with confidence in their safety and efficacy. The FDA is asking that you communicate this information to your members so that appropriate steps can be taken, if necessary, to ensure that they are obtaining and using only FDA-approved products.
Patients who may have received an unapproved IUD/IUS have been instructed to consult with their providers regarding next steps, including whether or not their IUD or IUS should be removed. So far, the FDA has been made aware of the use of these unapproved products in several states; however, as the investigation continues, this issue may impact other states nationwide. Information regarding the distribution of unapproved IUD/IUS products can be reported to FDA’s Office of Criminal Investigations at http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/CriminalInvestigations/default.htm, under “Report Suspected Criminal Activity.
” The FDA and other public health organizations continue to look into this situation, and will update the medical community as new information of public health importance becomes available. The Agency is committed to promoting and protecting the public health by ensuring that only safe and effective products are available to the American public. We appreciate your hard work and willingness in support of this effort.
Sincerely, Theresa Toigo, RPh, MBA Director,
Office of Special Health Issues Food and Drug Administration
Sarah, see below information you requested concerning FDA Safety and adverse effects. In our conversation 2/28/2014, you stated that the FDA did not mention Mirena was a unsafe product for women – See Below Mirena Iud – FDA articles, I’ve outlined a few for your review:
Lot Number 31218D
Event Date 04/11/2005
Event Type Other
Event Description
Staff assisting physician handed the mirena box to the provider. The mirena iud was placed into the patient. After placement it was noted that the iud had an expiration date of 03/05. This was reported to the medical director. The mirena distributor was contacted & stated that if the device was placed a week after the expiration date it should not be a problem. Per the distributor, no ill effects have been noted if inserted 10 days after expiration date. The patient will be monitored for any adverse effects.
Event Date 01/08/2004Event Type Injury Patient Outcome Life Threatening,Other Event Description – Pt had the mirena iud inserted in 04 – the pain upon insertion nearly made pt pass out – double painkillers didn’t help.
Pt whole body broke out in a severe sweat. Since having the iud inserted pt had severe cramps. Lower abdominal pain, pt had gained 30 pounds -size 4 to 14-, bloating, severe fatigue, mood swings – irritability, severe leg cramps, tingling in their fingers, joint pain and chest pain. Pt went back to the dr who steered the conversation away from the mirena and put them on estrogen for menopause. They took an ultrasound and said the iud appeared to be fine. Pt bled after the ultrasound for three days. They say “no one has any complaints about the mirena” yet this site http://www. Dysmenorrhea. Org/forum/documents all and more of the same symptoms pt is having and pt going to have their IUD removed. Pt hopes that their experience is not like others where the mirena has traveled on its own into their uterus, their stomach and even up to their head. Pt feels FDA needs to do something about the mirena. Consumers should be alerted to the side effects a huge amount of women are having from this product. Also, pain upon insertion is said to be negligible – but it is not negligible. It is severe in many cases.
The FDA also reported in April 2013 – Counterfeit Device circulating
Shrum, Kelly Dean., D.O.
Department of Health and Human Services
Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration
Rockville, MD 20857
CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
05-09-2012
Kelly Dean Shrum, D.O. (b)(6)
PROPOSAL TO DEBAR NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING DOCKET No. FDA-2012-N-0246
Dear Dr. Shrum:
This letter is to inform you that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to issue an order permanently debarring you from providing services in any capacity to a person that has an approved or pending drug product application. FDA bases this proposal on a finding that you were convicted of a felony under Federal law for conduct relating to the regulation of a drug product under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act). This letter also offers you an opportunity to request a hearing on this proposal.
Conduct Related to Conviction
On November 17, 2010, you were convicted by a jury of one count of Misbranding, a class A misdemeanor in violation of 21 U.S.C.§§ 331(a), 333(a)(1), 352(c) and 352(f)(1), and one count of
Health Care Fraud, a class C felony in violation of 18 U.S.C.§§ 1347 and 2. On September 30, 2011 the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas entered judgment against you. The underlying facts supporting this conviction are as follows.
You were a licensed physician practicing in the state of Arkansas. You offered gynecological and obstetric services to women, including providing forms of birth control. Your favored form of contraception was a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (IUD) known as Mirena. Mirena was made for BHCP, Inc. by Bayer Schering Pharma OY (Bayer). The only version of Mirena approved by FDA for marketing in the United States was approved on December 6, 2000 in New Drug Application (NDA) 21-225.
From in or about June of 2009, in the Eastern District of Arkansas and elsewhere, you purchased a foreign version of Mirena for use in your patients that was not FDA-approved. The labeling of the unapproved IUD was not in English, and did not include adequate directions for use. Arkansas Center for Women, Ltd. was registered with the Arkansas Medicaid Program. You were listed as the only physician affiliated with that clinic, and you signed the Medicaid provider contract on behalf of the Arkansas Center for Women. You submitted claims to the Arkansas Medicaid Program under the clinic’s provider number for procedure code J7302, Levonorgestrel Releasing Intrauterine Contraceptive (Mirena). This procedure code is specific to Bayer’s FDA-approved Mirena product and any item billed under this procedure code must be the FDA-approved version of Bayer’s Mirena.
From on or about January 15, 2008 through on or about June 12, 2009, you caused to be submitted claims for reimbursement to the Arkansas Medicaid Program, which included false representations. Specifically, you billed the Arkansas Medicaid Program as if you were administering the FDA approved version of Mirena, when you were actually administering a non-FDA-approved IUD.
FDA’s Finding
Section 306(a)(2)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(a)(2)(B)) requires debarment of an individual if FDA finds that the individual has been convicted of a felony under Federal law for conduct relating to the regulation of any drug product under the Act. As described above, you knowingly and willfully caused to be executed and attempted to cause to be executed a scheme and artifice to defraud the Arkansas Medicaid Program, and to obtain by fraudulent pretense and representations money under the custody and control of the Arkansas Medicaid Program, in connection with the delivery of or payment for health care benefits, items, or services, all in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 1347 and FDA finds that the conduct underlying this felony conviction relates to the regulation of a drug product under the Act because the use of an unapproved and misbranded drug undermines the drug approval process and FDA’s regulatory oversight over drug products marketed in the United States.
Section 306(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(c)(2)(A)(ii)) requires that your debarment be permanent. Proposed Action and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing – Based on the findings discussed above, FDA proposes to issue an order under section 306(a)(2)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(a)(2)(B)) permanently debarring you from providing services in any capacity to a person having an approved or pending drug product application.
In accordance with section 306 of the Act and 21 CFR Part 12, you are hereby given an opportunity to request a hearing to show why you should not be debarred as proposed in this letter.
If you decide to seek a hearing, you must file the following: (1) on or before 30 days from the date of receipt of this letter, a written notice of appearance and request for hearing; and (2) on or before 60 days from the date of receipt of this letter, the information on which you rely to justify a hearing. The procedures and requirements governing this notice of opportunity for hearing, a notice of appearance and request for a hearing, information and analysis to justify a hearing, and a grant or denial of a hearing are contained in 21 CFR part 12 and section 306(i) of the Act (21 U.S.C. 335a(i)).
Your failure to file a timely written notice of appearance and request for hearing constitutes an election by you not to use the opportunity for a hearing concerning your debarment and a waiver of any contentions concerning this action. If you do not request a hearing in the manner prescribed by the regulations, FDA will not hold a hearing and will issue a final debarment order as proposed in this letter.
A request for a hearing may not rest upon mere allegations or denials but must present specific facts showing that there is a genuine and substantial issue of fact that requires a hearing. A hearing will be denied if the data and information you submit, even if accurate, are insufficient to justify the factual determination urged. If it conclusively appears from the face of the information and factual analyses in your request for a hearing that there is no genuine and substantial issue of fact that precludes the order of debarment, the Commissioner of Food and Drugs will deny your request for a hearing and enter a final order of debarment.
You should understand that the facts underlying your conviction are not at issue in this proceeding. The only material issue is whether you were convicted as alleged in this notice and, if so, whether, as a matter of law, this conviction permits your debarment under section 306(a)(2)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a(a)(2)(B)) as proposed in this letter.
Your request for a hearing, including any information or factual analyses relied on to justify a hearing, must be identified with Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0246 and sent to the Division of Dockets Management, Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. You must file four copies of all submissions pursuant to this notice of opportunity for hearing. The public availability of information in these submissions is governed by 21 CFR 10.20(j). Publicly available submissions may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
This notice is issued under section 306 of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 335a) and under authority delegated to the Director, Office of Enforcement within the Food and Drug Administration. Sincerely,
/S/ rmando Zamora Acting Director Office of Enforcement Office of Regulatory Affairs
As noted above, you were also convicted of causing the introduction and delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of a misbranded drug in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 331 (a), 333(a)(1), 352(c), and 352(f)(1), a misdemeanor. This conviction independently could form the basis for permissive debarment under section 306(b)(2)(B) of the Act; however, FDA declines to make a determination regarding permissive debarment at this time in light of your felony conviction. Page Last Updated: 07/16/201
Event TypePatient Outcome – Event Description I am a mother of 3. My last two pregnancies were 2007 and 2008. I desired no more children. My gyno suggested the iud mirena. It was unsuccessful, so they suggested essure. I had the coils inserted in 2010. First 6 months was fine. Normal period. Even light at times. But i started to feel like i had the flu everyday and i was bleeding through my clothes. Constant headaches. Depression increased. Was told i had a hormone imbalance. Had an ablation the summer of 2011. One day surgery at (b)(6) hospital. Periods were somewhat normal for about 8 months. Then the side effects mentioned previously progressed. My periods were unstable and heavy and put me in the bed. How can you be a mother, wife, employee when you feel like you are dying?
Drugs company Bayer realised their product had been contaminated with AIDS, so what did they do, they still sold it because they didn’t want to lose money, and when …
Jan 28, 2011· … of dollars to end a scandal in which the company sold HIV.. in which the company sold HIV–contaminated…contracted HIV from the blood. You …
Multistate Outbreak of Fungal Meningitis and Other www2c.cdc.gov/podcasts/download.asp?f=8625771 – Oct 23, 2013· FDA reports conditions observed at NewEnglandCompoundingCenter facility (FDA Press Release: Oct. 26, …
There is a influx of international corruption throughout America – Against women and this is now being brought to the forefront.
NO WOMAN DESERVES TO BE USED FOR MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS OR BECOME STERALIZED DUE TO PAST DICTACTOR’S EUGENICS THEORIES OF USING WOMEN’S BODIES AND THEIR CHILDREN BORN OR UNBORN TO CONTROL THE WORLD POPULATION!
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATE ALL STATED FACTS IN THIS RESEARCH ANALYSIS! FOR YOUR FURTHER KNOWLEDGE! CABIRI, HAS MORE HIDDEN FACT’S TO REPORT!
John D. Rockefeller vs International Pharmaceutical Corporation’s & Women Reproductive Health – Research Analysis – Mirena – IUD
America’s population being controlled by numerous international pharmaceutical companies and private entities – Follow The LINKS
Mirena-IuD Business Standards and practices observation information:
Where are the documents for the clinical centers, doctors and women who participated in these clinical studies which proves the outcomes, facts, observations, and their adverse effects from their Mirena-Iud clinical study?
Approval for marketing these devices in the US follows in five to ten years
In 1993, the European Committee for Standardization (Comité Europeen de
Normalisation, CEN) published standard EN 540, a precursor of the international
standard ISO 14155. Like the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), CEN
is an international nonprofit organization providing a platform for cooperating, volunteer organizations to develop consensus standards. In 1996, ISO and CEN joined forces to create the first version of ISO 14155, which repeated EN 540 standards. Almost immediately, the two organizations formed parallel working groups (WGs) to expand the standard. WG4 of ISO’s TC (technical committee) 194 developed more elaborate general requirements in ISO 14155 part 1, while CEN’s WG elaborated part 2, requirements for the clinical investigation plan. In 2003, the organizations published both.
European Committee for Standardization (Comité Europeen de
Normalisation, CEN) published standard EN 540, a precursor of the international standard ISO 14155. – How can a international country pass a ISO standard for United States and get the U.S. Government and Japan to agree? (This deserves more scrutiny?)
Why would United States adopt a ISO standard put into place by a international non-profit organization?
When did the ISO organization of the United States partner with the CEN (Comité Europeen de Normalisation) a nonprofit organization?
Who are the members or leaders of these organizations whom are impacting the healthcare industry in the United State’s. Are they in America or located abroad?(SEE ABOVE PDF FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS)
Implanon Pharmceutical History:
Norplant is a form of birth control developed by Sheldon J. Segal and Horatio B. Croxatto at the Population Councilbeginning in 1966, with the first clinical trial in Chile in 1974.It was first approved in Finland on November 23, 1983, where it was manufactured by Leiras Oy Pharmaceuticals.
Birth control type
Hormonal Progestogen implant
First use
1983 (Finland)
Who are the members of this council? What do they have to do with the United States pharmaceutical industry? Why is there a international country supplying medical devices in the United State’s who is not listed as a healthcare distributor or provider in the United States? Is there a connection between European Committee for Standardization and the Population Council? Is the American Government aware of these organizations who are supplying U.S. Citizens with vital medical devices and drugs since 1966? Is Finland – Europe – Germany connected?
The original (six capsule) Norplant was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on December 10, 1990, and marketed in the United States in 1991 by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals.Norplant distribution in the United States ended in 2002; limited supplies still remained in the U.S. until 2004. Norplant was withdrawn from the UK market in 1999.Production of Norplant was discontinued globally in 2008.
Norplant II (Norplant-2, Jadelle), also developed by the Population Council and manufactured by Schering Oy, consists of two small (2.5mm × 43mm) silicone rods each containing 75 mg of levonorgestrel in a polymer matrix, instead of six capsules. It was approved May 31, 1996 by the FDA as being effective for three years; it was subsequently approved November 22, 2002 by the FDA as being effective for five years. Jadelle has not been marketed in the United States;Jadelle is the successor to the original Norplant in USAID’s contract beginning January 2007
…2011/039418 was published on April 07. Title of the invention: “AN INTRAUTERINE SYSTEM.” Applicants:BAYER SCHERING PHARMA OY (FI). Inventors: Pirjo Sallinen (DE), Faisal Shafiq (DE), Wolfgang Kaufhold (DE), Christian Wamprecht…
US Fed News Service, Including US State News; October 22, 2010; 700+ words
…acquisition costs and thus purchased unapproved IUDs. All Mirena(R) IUDs are manufactured in Finland by Bayer Schering Pharma OY. However, only one version of the Mirena(R) IUD has been approved by the FDA for use in the U. S. To...
Bayer Healthcare – Bayer Pharma-Bayer Schering Pharma OY – Berlex Schering AG- Population Council – European committee??
Biotie is a specialized drug development company focused primarily on products for neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders. For the past years, Biotie has successfully operated a strategy built around search, profile and partner. This has delivered Selincro (nalmefene) for alcohol dependency, which received European marketing authorization in February 2013 and is currently being rolled out across Europe by partner H. Lundbeck A/S, and tozadenant, a novel A2a antagonist which is transitioning into Phase 3 development for Parkinson’s disease in collaboration with UCB Pharma S.A..
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
Schering OY – Biotie – Merck – Bayer Schering OY – UCB Pharma S.A.
Biotie also has exclusive rights through an option to acquire Neurelis Inc., which includes NRL-1, an intranasal formulation of diazepam for epileptic seizure management. Biotie plans to seek further opportunities of this kind to generate a strong portfolio of products. Biotie’s shares are listed on NASDAQ OMX Helsinki?
A61F FILTERS IMPLANTABLE INTO BLOOD VESSELS; PROSTHESES; DEVICES PROVIDING PATENCY TO, OR PREVENTING COLLAPSING OF, TUBULAR STRUCTURES OF THE BODY, E.G. STENTS; ORTHOPAEDIC, NURSING OR CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICES; FOMENTATION; TREATMENT OR PROTECTION OF EYES OR EARS; BANDAGES, DRESSINGS OR ABSORBENT PADS; FIRST-AID KITS 4 – See more at: http://www.patentbuddy.com/Company/Profile/SCHERING-OY/163606#sthash.vR1v8Wjl.dpuf
A61J CONTAINERS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR MEDICAL OR PHARMACEUTICAL PURPOSES; DEVICES OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR BRINGING PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS INTO PARTICULAR PHYSICAL OR ADMINISTERING FORMS; DEVICES FOR ADMINISTERING FOOD OR MEDICINES ORALLY; BABY COMFORTERS; DEVICES FOR RECEIVING SPITTLE –
On March 13, 2006, Merck KGaAannounced a €14.6bn bid for Schering. Merck’s takeover bid was surpassed by Bayer‘s €16.5bnwhite-knightbid for Schering on March 23, 2006. In June 2006 Bayer finally bought the majority of shares, over 90%. A domination agreement using the code name “Step One” was used for the take-over. As a result of the take-over by Bayer, Schering AG merged with Bayer’s pharmaceutical sector to form Bayer Schering Pharma AG in December 2006.
On February 17, 2007 the company publicly announced that 1,000 jobs would be cut through voluntary redundancyfrom the Berlin operations with effect until March 2008. In 2011 the name Bayer Schering Pharma was changed into Bayer Healthcare, thus removing the last traces of Schering from the company formed in the merger in 2006 – Bayer – Merck
KgAA – Schering OY – Bayer Pharma OY – Bayer Healtcare -Bayer pharmaceutical – Bayer Shering AG – Bayer Schering AG Pharma
Continue Reading – American’s has been watched for decades!
The Population Council is an international, nonprofit, non-governmental organization that seeks to improve the well-being and reproductive health of current and future generations around the world and to help achieve a humane, equitable, and sustainable balance between people and resources. The Council conducts biomedical, social science, and public health research and helps build research capacities in developing countries. Established in 1952, the Council is governed by an international board of trustees.
Headquartered in New York, the Population Council has 17 offices in Africa, Asia, and Latin America and does work in more than 45 countries. With an annual budget of $95.1 million [2009], it employs nearly 575 people from 32 countries with expertise in a wide array of scientific disciplines.
“Since John D. Rockefeller 3rdfounded the Population Council in 1952, the world’s socioeconomic and demographic landscape has undergone profound and unprecedented changes, and the Council’s research agenda has evolved accordingly. HIV/AIDS, urbanization, adolescents, and poverty, gender and youth are just some of the topics that have been added to the Council’s longstanding work in biomedical research, contraceptive development, and improving access to high-quality reproductive health services.”
The Population Council Board of Trustees is comprised of leaders in the fields of biomedicine, business, economic development, health, the media, philanthropy, and social science.
The organization receives funding from the government as well as private foundations, corporations, multilateral organizations, and individuals.
“Funding Sources: US government (58%), foundations , corporations, other nongovernmental organizations, and individuals (13%), investment returns(17%), other governments (4%), multilateral organizations (2%), royalities (6%). Accepts contract research. Budget (2009): USD 95.1 million. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Population_Council
The financial support of our donors allows the Population Council to deliver solutions that help vulnerable people in developing countries live healthier, more productive lives. We are committed to spending our funds efficiently, investing 83 cents of every dollar directly into research and program activities.
The Population Council is a GuideStar Valued Partner, has earned an “A” rating from Charity Watch for its strong financial management, and has been awarded the “Best in America” seal from Independent Charities of America for meeting the “highest standards of public accountability, program effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness.” According to Charity Navigator, the Population Council “exceeds or meets industry standards and performs as well as or better than most charities in its Cause.”
The chart on this page provides details on the Council’s sources of support and use of funds.
How can this be the Best in America when the company was previously formed by international countries dating back in the early 1900’s? This area of governance of the “Population council needs more American Government critiquing, very disturbing!
7 September 1994: “Imperatives for the Future: Looking back, moving forward, Creating the Future we Want” by Margaret Catley-Carlson, President, Population Council at The International Conference on Population and Development, Plenary Session.
Drugs company Bayer realized their product had been contaminated with AIDS, so what did they do, they still sold it because they didn’t want to lose money, and when the US officials found out, they knew they couldn’t continue, so they sold it to the Europeans, with full knowledge of US officials.
Now another drugs company, Baxter got caught shipping vaccines with live bird-flu virus in them to 18 countries, and when caught out were calling it an ‘accident’ !!!:
Be prepared people, pass this on…….. USAID Provides Population Council $65 Million for HIV/AIDS Operations Research] (10/15/2002).BAYER scandal – HIV Contaminated Drug – 1000’s contracted HIV –
Population Funding Sources
HIV/AIDS ‘Reproductive Health’
Antares Pharma and Population Council Announce Preliminary Positive Phase 2 Trial Results
First Transdermal Contraceptive ATD™ Gel Contains Nestorone®
TOBACCO & PHARMACEUTICAL??
In 1977, the Population Council reported on the health hazards smoking posed to women who were taking birth control pills. Despite this, in the early 1990s the Population Council sought funding from the Council for Tobacco Research, although many of their requests were turned down.
Senior Management Accessed December 2009: Peter J. Donaldson –President – Mar Aguilar– Director, International Support Wendy Baldwin– Director, Poverty, Gender, and Youth Program – Safaa El-Kogali– Regional Director, Middle East and North Africa – John Bongaarts– Vice President, Distinguished Scholar – Saroj Pachauri– Regional Director, South and East Asia –Naomi Rutenberg– Vice President, HIV and AIDS Program – James E. Sailer– Vice President, Corporate Affairs Division – John W. Townsend– Vice President, Reproductive Health Program – Patricia C. Vaughan– General Counsel and Secretary
New York Headquarters One Dag Hammarskjold Plaza (See Below) New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 339-0500 Fax: (212) 755-6052 Email: pubinfo@popcouncil.org Homepage: http://www.popcouncil.org
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
Dag Hjalmar Agne Carl Hammarskjöld (1905-1961) “was the youngest of four sons of Agnes (Almquist) Hammarskjöld and Hjalmar Hammarskjöld, prime minister of Sweden, member of the Hague Tribunal, governor of Uppland, chairman of the Board of the Nobel Foundation…
“His main intellectual and professional interest for some years, however, was political economy. He took a second degree at Uppsala in economics, in 1928, a law degree in 1930, and a doctoral degree in economics in 1934. For one year, 1933, Hammarskjöld taught economics at the University of Stockholm. But both his own desire and his heritage led him to enter public service to which he devoted thirty-one years in Swedish financial affairs, Swedish foreign relations, and global international affairs. His success in his first position, that of secretary from 1930 to 1934 to a governmental commission on unemployment, brought him to the attention of the directors of the Bank of Sweden who made him the Bank’s secretary in 1935. From 1936 to 1945, he held the post of undersecretary in the Ministry of Finance. From 1941 to 1948, thus overlapping the undersecretaryship by four years, he was placed at the head of the Bank of Sweden, the most influential financial structure in the country.
“Hammarskjöld has been credited with having coined the term “planned economy”. Along with his eldest brother, Bo, who was then undersecretary in the Ministry of Social Welfare, he drafted the legislation which opened the way to the creation of the present, so-called “welfare state. ” In the latter part of this period, he drew attention as an international financial negotiator for his part in the discussions with Great Britain on the postwar economic reconstruction of Europe, in his reshaping of the twelve-year-old United States-Swedish trade agreement, in his participation in the talks which organized the Marshall Plan, and in his leadership on the Executive Committee of the Organization for European Economic Cooperation.
“Hammarskjöld’s connection with the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs began in 1946 when he became its financial adviser. In 1949 he was named to an official post in the Foreign Ministry and in 1951 became the deputy foreign minister, with cabinet rank, although he continued to remain aloof from membership in any political party…. Hammarskjöld represented Sweden as a delegate to the United Nationsi in 1949 and again from 1951 to 1953. Receiving fifty-seven votes out of sixty, Hammarskjöld was elected Secretary-General of the United Nations in 1953 for a five-year term and reelected in 1957…”
Additional References: Susan Williams,Who Killed Hammarskjöld?: The UN, the Cold War, and White Supremacy in Africa (London: Hurst & Co., 2012)
Henning Melber, “Dag Hammarskjöld, the United States and Africa,” in: Review of African Political Economy, 39 (2012) 131, p. 151-159.
Cohort Replacement and Homeostasis in World Population, 1950–2100/ Francesco C. Billari. Gianpiero Dalla-Zuanna
Using a simple empirical approach, we analyze world and regional-level cohort replacement as determined by the key components of population dynamics, i.e. fertility, survival, and migration, for 1950–2010, using UN data. We define two kinds of homeostatic relationships among these components: fertility responses to mortality change (type I) and migration responses to changes in net reproduction (type II), and show that both can be observed to some degree in this period. We examine the extent of cohort replacement embodied in the medium-variant UN population projections over 2010–2100 and consider how the international migration assumptions made in such projections would be affected by a homeostatic perspective. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 563–585)
Family Policies and the Western European Fertility Divide:Insights from a Natural Experiment in Belgium/ Sebastian Klüsener, Karel Neels, Michaela Kreyenfeld
Countries in Northwestern Europe, including Belgium, report cohort fertility levels of close to two children per woman; whereas Central European countries, such as Germany, have levels of around 1.6 children. In seeking to explain these differences, some scholars have stressed the role of the social policy context, while others have pointed to variation in fertility-related social norms. But because these influences are interdependent, it is difficult to isolate their effects on fertility trends. This study attempts to disentangle these two factors by drawing on a quasi-natural experiment. After World War I Germany was compelled to cede the Eupen–Malmedy territory to Belgium. The population of this region has retained its German linguistic identity, but has been subject to Belgian social policies. Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information We examine whether the fertility trends in this German-speaking region of Belgium follow the Belgian or the German pattern. Our findings indicate that they generally resemble the Belgian pattern. This suggests that institutional factors are important for understanding the current fertility differences in Western Europe. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 587–610) Geographic Divergence in Mortality in the United States/ Andrew Fenelon
The United States trails other developed countries in adult mortality, a process that has become more pronounced over the past several decades. However, comparisons are complicated by substantial geographic variations in mortality within the United States. The second half of the twentieth century was characterized by a substantial divergence in adult mortality between the South and the rest of the United States. The article examines trends in US geographic variation in mortality between 1965 and 2004, in particular the aggregate divergence in mortality between the southern states and states with more favorable mortality experience. Relatively high smoking-attributable mortality in the South explains 50–100 percent of the divergence for men between 1965 and 1985 and up to 50 percent for women between 1985 and 2004. There is also a geographic correspondence between the contribution of smoking and other factors, suggesting that smoking may be one piece of a more complex health-related puzzle. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 611–634)
The Apparent Failure of Russia’s Pronatalist Family Policies/ Tomas Frejka, Sergei Zakharov Russia has a history of pronatalist policies dating back to the 1930s. Two sets of pronatalist measures were implemented during the past 40 years. The one designed in the early 1980s proved to be a clear failure. Instead of raising fertility, completed cohort fertility declined from 1.8 births per woman for the 1960 birth cohort to 1.6 for the 1968 cohort. The government of President Putin became concerned with the dire demographic conditions of high mortality and low fertility in Russia in the 1990s and early 2000s. A comprehensive set of pronatalist measures came into effect in January 2007. The period total fertility rate increased from 1.3 births per woman in 2006 to 1.6 in 2011, which the authorities view as an unqualified success. Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information An unbiased demographic evaluation as well as analysis of Russian experts reveals that apparently the measures mainly caused a lowering of the age at birth and shortening of birth intervals. It appears that any real fertility increase is questionable, i.e. cohort fertility is not likely to increase appreciably. The recent pronatalist measures are likely to turn out to be a failure. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 635–647) Inequalities in Healthy Life Expectancy in Eastern Europe Yuka Minagawa
Compared to the large body of research on mortality differentials between East Central Europe and the former Soviet Union, little attention has been paid to how overall population health status differs between these two country groups. This article investigates disparities in population health, measured by healthy life expectancy (HLE) between ages 20 and 74, for 23 Eastern European countries in 2008. There are substantial disparities in partial HLE between East Central Europe and the former Soviet Union, amounting to differences of 10 years on average for men and women. In addition, factors reflecting the malfunction of existing social structure are inversely associated with partial HLE. Accordingly, populations in countries where corruption, restriction of freedom, and violence are prevalent spend fewer years in good health. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 649–671) The Characteristics Approach to the Measurement of Population Aging/ Warren C. Sanderson, Sergei Scherbov
Conventional measures of population aging, such as proportions over age 65, can present a misleading picture of the aging process by not taking account of changes in people’s characteristics beyond their chronological age—for example, changes in remaining life expectancy, health and morbidity, disability rates, and cognitive functioning. The “characteristics approach” set out in this article encompasses multiple features of population aging, yielding new measures that can better inform both demographic analysis and public policy debate. We relate the brief history of this approach, examine its basic mathematical structure, and give empirical examples of the insights it offers, drawing on data from West Germany, Japan, Russia, and the United States. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 673–685) Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & InformationThe Effects of Population on the Depletion of Fresh Water/ Robert J. Wyman The most immediate environmental problem in major regions of the world is probably the scarcity of fresh water for agriculture. Insufficiency and irregularity of rainfall require the use of stored water. Both major compartments for fresh water storage—glaciers and groundwater—are being depleted rapidly and at similar rates. Drawdown of groundwater is primarily the result of irrigation required to supply the food needs of large populations. Glacier melt is an effect of global warming chiefly caused by high levels of industrial production and transport. However, an important fraction of glacier melt is caused by food chain emissions (agricultural greenhouse gases and black carbon or cooking soot). In toto, the loss of water resulting from food and agriculture may be significantly greater than that resulting from industrial production and transport, the factors more commonly cited. This suggests that the role of population, closely linked to food and agriculture, is central to the depletion of fresh water. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 687–704)
Archives
Destutt de Tracy on Liberty, Equality, and Population Increase Writers on the incipient demographic transition witnessed in the United States in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries made much of the supposed effect of the spread of democratic values and weakening of rigid class divisions. Greater security of property and widened opportunities for advancement yielded improved survivorship and gave parents new reason to limit their childbearing.
A century earlier, a somewhat similar argument was propounded by the French Enlightenment writer Antoine Louis Claude Destutt de Tracy (1754–1836), in a work written in about 1807, during a stay in America. The work was a commentary on Montesquieu’s De l’esprit des lois [The Spirit of Laws] (1748). Tracy’s commentary was organized in the same chapter order as Montesquieu’s but was anything but slavish approbation. His object, he said, was to reflect on each of Montesquieu’s topics but “to form my own opinions.” Book XXIII of Montesquieu was titled “Of laws in the relation they bear to the number of inhabitants” and was concerned mostly with the experience of classical Greece and Rome. Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information (Excerpts were printed in the Archives section of PDR 17, no. 4.) In contrast, Tracy was interested not in legislation but in the broader societal factors governing population growth, and in the conditions of his own time. Tracy sought first to explain the remarkable pace of natural increase then prevailing in America. In Europe, high child mortality among the poorer classes was an outcome of the extreme inequality of the Ancien Régime. With labor properly recompensed and societies “untrammelled by absurd institutions or establishments,” rapid population increase like that of the United States could ensue.
The factors favoring growth were “sufficient subsistence, liberty, equality, and liberal information.” But the increase was only for a time; it would be limited, well short of any ultimate failure of subsistence, by “all the knowledge, all the resources, and all the succors by which we may preserve ourselves against the miseries and misfortunes which our nature is liable to.” Individual happiness—“the true end of society”—might call for such restraint, but on the part of citizens, not governments. He ends with a caustic remark on “barbarous legislators” and their supportive moralists who approve of capital punishment while criminalizing prudential measures to prevent unwanted births. Destutt de Tracy admired American republicanism and in turn was held in high esteem by many in the United States—notably by Thomas Jefferson, who translated 706 Archives and arranged for publication of the Commentary. (How Jefferson, a slaveholder, might have read Tracy’s flat assertion in it that “no animated being once born, and capable of enjoyment and suffering, is, or ought to be, the property of any one” is intriguing to contemplate.) Tracy was a prominent figure in post-revolutionary France, having narrowly survived the Reign of Terror, and became a senator under Napoleon I. His major work is Élémens d’idéologie (1801–15), the final volume of which was translated (also by Jefferson) as A Treatise on Political Economy. The text below is from A Commentary and Review of Montesquieu’s Spirit of Laws; transl. Thomas Jefferson (Philadelphia: Duane, 1811), Book XXIII, pp. 245–251. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 705–709)
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
Book Reviews
(Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 711–721)
What to Expect When No One’s Expecting: America’s Coming DemographicDisaster /Jonathan V. Last Reviewed by David Coleman
The Rise of Women: The Growing Gender Gap in Education and What It Means for American Schools /Thomas A. DiPrete and Claudia Buchmann Reviewed by Barbara Schneider
The Great Escape: Health, Wealth, and the Origins of Inequality/ Angus Deaton Reviewed by William McGreevey
Short Reviews(Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 722–726)
Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations in Europe: First Results from SHARE after the Economic Crisis/ Axel Börsch-Supan, Martina Brandt, Howard Litwin, and Guglielmo Weber (eds.)
Fertility, Education, Growth, and Sustainability/ David de la Croix
Documents
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Intergenerational Equity The UN Secretary-General is required by reason of the office to pronounce on many and diverse issues. One such matter, taken up recently in response to a request from the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), is the nature and basis of our obligations to future generations. This is the subject of a report by Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, “Intergenerational Solidarity and the Needs of Future Generations,” prepared for the High-Level Political Forum on sustainable development and issued in August 2013.
At the core of the intellectual challenges raised by this subject, as the Secretary-General notes, is the inescapable fact that those yet to be born do not exist. If, not existing, they hold no rights, where is our duty to them? Proponents of a rights-based approach to sustainability have not been idle in searching for a moral foundation, but have been forced to search in legal domains far afield. Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information Naive appeals to an inter-generational covenant fail because a covenant is a contract, and, as Ban writes, there can be no contract if one of the parties does not exist. A chain of covenants would break down because Generation X cannot force Generation X+N to enter into a contract with Generation X+N+1.
Others have turned to the idea of trusteeship: that we in the present hold (and must manage) the earth in the beneficial interest of future generations. Even if this is so, and glossing over assorted technical problems of how a valid trust is declared, the beneficial interest should accrue to us as well as to our children and more remote descendants. The essential problem, as the report makes clear and as emerges every day in the climate change debate, is how to reconcile pursuing economic growth and poverty reduction today and preserving natural capital for the future.
Where law fails to deliver justice, economics or considerations of equity, or likely both, are bound to rush in. Economists have turned to Government as a perpetual agent that can form the bridge between generations—and for sustainability at the global level, as some hope (and others fear), even World Government. But however good the scientific information available (and the report urges that we produce more of it), any government will in the end have to confront the matter of equity—“a roguish thing,” as the jurist John Selden famously put it in the seventeenth century. What is judged equitable by one observer may be judged inequitable by another.
Whatever problems moral philosophers may have had, Ban points out, the common man almost universally believes that we in the present have some responsibility for those in the future. Our concerns, however, are attenuated with time: we care more about our grandchildren than our great-grandchildren, and so on. And the complications mount up: the world those descendants will occupy will differ vastly from our own, especially with regard to technology, and the degree and nature of that difference will partly depend on the decisions we make now. The report notes the sustainability between natural and man-made capital, as well as the limits on sustainability dictated by irreversibilities and discontinuities.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information In the end, Ban would rely on a mix of the precautionary principle and “win-win” policies (as between present and future generations), supplemented by plenty of education and scientific research. If this sounds like a bland nostrum, it is because this even-tempered and intelligent assessment holds out little hope for easy fixes to what is a conjoined problem of individual conscience and global collective choice. The excerpt below comprises paragraphs 10–28 of the report, which is UN General Assembly document A/68/322. (Population and Development Review 2013; 39[4]: 727–731)
Established in 1952 by John D. Rockefeller III, with important funding from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Council is governed by an international board of trustees. The 2006 board includes leaders in biomedicine, business, economic development, government, health, international finance, the media, philanthropy, and social science.
Headquartered in New York, the Population Council has 18 offices in Africa, Asia, and Latin America and does work in more than 60 countries. With an annual budget of around $74 million, it employs more than 500 people from 33 countries with expertise in a wide array of scientific disciplines. Roughly 55 percent are based outside the United States.
The Council has its roots in the discredited eugenics movement. The first president of the Council was a eugenicist appointed by Rockefeller; Frederick Osborn, author of Preface to Eugenics(New York, 1940), leader of the American Eugenics Society, and one of the founding members of the Pioneer Fund. Osborn was vice president or president of the Population Council until 1959. In 1968 he wrote, “Eugenic goals are most likely to be achieved under another name than eugenics *Further Below Details
One-third of its research relates to HIV and ;AIDS its other major program areas are reproductive health and poverty, youth, and gender. It held the license for Norplant contraceptive implant, and now holds the license for Mirena intrauterine system. The Population Council also publishes the journals Population and Development Review, which reports scientific research on the interrelationships between population and socioeconomic development and provides a forum for discussion of related issues of public policy, and Studies in Family Planning, which focuses on public health, social science, and biomedical research on sexual and reproductive health, fertility, and family planning.
Definition of Eugenics/juːˈdʒɛnɪks/; from Greek eu, meaning “good/well”, and -genēs, meaning “born”) is the belief and practice of improving the genetic quality of the human population. It is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human genetic traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of people with desired traits (positive eugenics), and reduced reproduction of people with less-desired or undesired traits (negative eugenics).
More on Eugenics Theory – Very Disturbing
Eugenics, as a modern concept, was originally developed by Francis Galton. It has roots in France, Germany, Great Britain and the United States in the 1860s-1870s – American William Goodell (lived from 1829 to 1894) advocated castration and spaying of the insane.Mortality rates from “Battey’s operation”, the surgical removal of healthy ovaries, was as high as one in five deaths at the time, but the surgery kept being performed
Francis Galton had read his half-cousin Charles Darwin‘s theory of evolution, which sought to explain the development of plant and animal species, and desired to apply it to humans. Galton believed that desirable traits were hereditary based on biographical studies. In 1883, one year after Darwin’s death, Galton gave his research a name: “Eugenics”.
Throughout its recent history, eugenics has remained a controversial concept.As a social movement, eugenics reached its greatest popularity in the early decades of the 20th century. At this point in time, eugenics was practiced around the world and was promoted by governments, and influential individuals and institutions. Many countries enacted various eugenics policies and programmes, including: genetic screening,birth control, promoting differential birth rates, marriage restrictions, segregation (both racial segregation and segregation of the mentally ill from the rest of the population), compulsory sterilization, forced abortions or forced pregnancies, and genocide. Most of these policies were later regarded as coercive or restrictive, and now few jurisdictions implement policies that are explicitly labeled as eugenic or unequivocally eugenic in substance. Very Disturbing Facts Below!
The methods of implementing eugenics varied by country; however, some of the early 20th century methods involved identifying and classifying individuals and their families, including the poor, mentally ill, blind, deaf, developmentally disabled, promiscuous women, homosexuals, and racial groups (such as the Romaand Jews in Nazi Germany) as “degenerate” or “unfit”, the segregation or institutionalization of such individuals and groups, their sterilization, euthanasia, and their mass murder.The practice of euthanasia was carried out on hospital patients in the Aktion T4 centers such as Hartheim Castle.
Eugenics became an academic discipline at many colleges and universities, and received funding from many sources.Three International Eugenics Conferences presented a global venue for eugenists with meetings in 1912 in London, and in 1921 and 1932 in New York. Eugenic policies were first implemented in the early 1900s in the United States.
Later, in the 1920s and 30s, the eugenic policy of sterilizing certain mental patients was implemented in other countries, including Belgium,Brazil,Canada,and Sweden.The scientific reputation of eugenics started to decline in the 1930s, a time when Ernst Rüdin used eugenics as a justification for the racial policies of Nazi Germany. Nevertheless, in Sweden the eugenics program continued until 1975.
Its political aspects involved advocating laws allowing the pursuit of eugenic objectives, such as sterilization laws. Its moral aspects included rejection of the doctrine that all human beings are born equal, and redefining morality purely in terms of genetic fitness.Its racist elements included pursuit of a pure “Nordic race” or “Aryan” genetic pool and the eventual elimination of “less fit” races
Both the public and some of the scientific community have associated eugenics with Nazi abuses, such as enforced “racial hygiene“, human experimentation, and the extermination of “undesired” population groups. However, developments in genetic, genomic, and reproductive technologies at the end of the 20th century are raising for some people numerous new questions regarding the ethical status of eugenics, effectively creating a resurgence of interest in the subject.
Today, eugenics is regarded by some as a brutal movement which inflicted human rights violations on millions. Some practices engaged in the name of eugenics, such as attacks on reputation and violations of privacy, reproductive rights, the right to life, the right to found a family, and the right to freedom from discrimination, are today classified as violations of human rights.
Beginning in the 1980s, the history and concept of eugenics were widely discussed as knowledge about genetics advanced significantly, making practical genetic engineering, which has been widely used to produce genetically modified organisms, with genetically modified foodsbeing most visible to the general public. Endeavors such as the Human GenomeProjectmade the effective modification of the human species seem possible again (as did Darwin’s initial theory of evolution in the 1860s, along with the rediscovery of Mendel’s laws in the early 20th century). The difference at the beginning of the 21st century was the guarded attitude towards eugenics, which had become a watchword to be feared rather than embraced. Article 23 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons withDisabilitiesprohibits compulsory sterilization of disabled individuals and guarantees their right to adopt children.
A few scientific researchers such as psychologist Richard Lynn, psychologist Raymond Cattell, and scientist Gregory Stock have openly called for eugenic policies using modern technology, but they represent a minority opinion in current scientific and cultural circles.One attempted implementation of a form of eugenics was a “genius sperm bank” (1980–99) created by Robert Klark Graham, from which nearly 230 children were conceived (the best-known donors were Nobel Prize winners William Shockley and J.D.Watson). After Graham passed away in 1997 funding ran out, and within two years his sperm bank had closed. In the U.S. and Europe, though, these attempts have frequently been criticized as in the same spirit of classist and racist forms of eugenics of the 1930.
Because of its association with compulsory sterilization and the racial ideals of the Nazi Party, the word eugenics is rarely used by the advocates of such programs.
The Bell Curve argued that immigration from countries with low national IQ is undesirable. According to Raymond Cattell, “when a country is opening its doors to immigration from diverse countries, it is like a farmer who buys his seeds from different sources by the sack, with sacks of different average quality of contents
Supporting Countries of Eugenics Theory:
China:
The Chinese Maternal and Infant Health Care Law (1994), which has been referred to as the “Eugenic Law” in the West, required a health check prior to marriage. Carriers of certain genetic diseases were allowed to marry only if they are sterilized, or agree to use some other form of long-term contraception. Much Western comment on the law has been critical, but many Chinese geneticists are supportive of the policy.
In the Chinese province of Sichuan in 1999, a sperm bank called Notables’ Sperm Bank, opened, with professors as the only permitted donors. The semen bank was approved by the authority for family planning in the provincial capital Chengdu.
Japan
Despite the unambiguous wording of the law, the law was used by local authorities as justification for measures enforcing forced sterilization and abortions upon people with certain genetic disorders, as well as leprosy, as well as an excuse for legalized discrimination against people with physical and mental handicaps.
Supporting Countries of Eugenics Theory:
Russia
In Russia, one supporter of preventive eugenics is the president of the Independent Psychiatric Association of Russia Yuri Savenko, who justifies forced sterilization of women, which is practiced in Moscow psychoneurological nursing homes. He states that “one needs a more strictly adjusted and open control for the practice of preventive eugenics, which, in itself, is, in its turn, justifiable.
In 1993, the health minister of the Russian Federation issued the order that determined the procedure of Forced abortion and sterilization of disabled women and the need for court decision to perform them.The order was repealed by the head of Ministry of Health and Social Development of the Russian Federation Tatyana Golikova in 2009.Therefore, now women can be subjected to compulsory sterilization without court decision, according to the Perm Krai ombudswoman Tatyana Margolina.In 2008, Tatyana Margolina reported that 14 women with disabilities were subjected to compulsory medical sterilization in Ozyorskiy psychoneurological nursing home whose director was Grigori Bannikov
United States
John D. Rockefeller – Head American Eugenics Leader
Mississippi and Montana require a blood test prior to marriage.While these tests are typically restricted to the detection of the sexually transmitted disease syphilis (which was the most common STD at the time these laws were enacted), some partners will voluntarily test for other diseases and genetic incompatibilities. Harris polls in 1986 and 1992 recorded majority public support for limited forms of germ-line intervention, especially to prevent “children inheriting usually fatal genetic disease” – This portion fails to mention the theory of population control by fertility utilizing pharmaceutical corporations!
Pre-Galtonian philosophies – Adolf Hitler considered Sparta to be the first “Völkisch State”, and much like Ernst Haeckel before him, praised Sparta for its selective infanticide policy, though the Nazis believed the children were killed outright and not exposed.
The Twelve Tables of Roman Law, established early in the formation of the Roman Republic, stated in the fourth tablethat deformed children must be put to death. In addition, patriarchs in Roman society were given the right to “discard” infants at their discretion.
This was often done by drowning undesired newborns in the Tiber River. Commenting on the Roman practice of eugenics, the philosopher Seneca wrote that: “We put down mad dogs; we kill the wild, untamed ox; we use the knife on sick sheep to stop their infecting the flock; we destroy abnormal offspring at birth; children, too, if they are born weak or deformed, we drown. Yet this is not the work of anger, but of reason – to separate the sound from the worthless.The practice of open infanticide in the Roman Empire did not subside until its Christianization.
Charles Davenport
A scientist from the United States, stands out as one of history’s leading eugenicists. He took eugenics from a scientific idea to a worldwide movement implemented in many countries.Davenport obtained funding to establish the Biological Experiment Station at Cold Spring Harbor in 1904and the Eugenics Records Office in 1910, which provided the scientific basis for later Eugenic policies such as enforced sterilization.
He became the first President of the international Federation of Eugenics Organizations (IFEO) in 1925, an organization he was instrumental in building.While Davenport was located at Cold Spring Harbor and received money from the Carnegie Institute of Washington, the organization known as the Eugenics Record Office (ERO) started to become an embarrassment after the well-known debates between Davenport and Franz Boas. Instead, Davenport occupied the same office and the same address at Cold Spring Harbor, but his organization now became known as the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories, which currently retains the archives of the Eugenics Record Office.However, Davenport’s racist views were not supported by all geneticists at Cold Spring Harbor, including H. J. Muller, Bentley Glass, and Esther Lederberg.
In 1932 Davenport welcomed Ernst Rüdin, a prominent Swiss eugenicist and race scientist, as his successor in the position of President of the IFEO.Rüdin, director of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Institute for Psychiatry, located in Munich), a Kaiser Wilhelm Institute,was a co-founder (with his brother-in-law Alfred Ploetz) of the German Society for the Racial Hygiene.Other prominent figures in Eugenics who were associated with Davenport included Harry Laughlin(United States), Havelock Ellis (United Kingdom), Irving Fischer (United States), Eugen Fischer (Germany), Madison Grant (United States), Lucien Howe (United States), and Margaret Sanger (United States, founder of Planned Parenthood).
These are violations against human right’s – How can you just inhiliate a entire population, due to there high IQ or low IQ status quo or family gene make up? This is an monstrocity to every human being on earth, mostly women who bear children and are losing them, due to the fact someone in a elite location of the world feels your child or children will not be considered a product part of society? Is this fair to human beings isn’t living a human choice?
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
United Kingdom – Eugenics Theory cont’d
In the United Kingdom, eugenics never received significant state funding, but it was supported by many prominent figures of different political persuasions before World War I, including: Liberal economists William Beveridge and John Maynard Keynes; Fabian socialists such as Irish author George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells and Sidney Webb; and Conservativessuch as the future Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Arthur Balfour.The influential economist John Maynard Keynes was a prominent supporter of Eugenics, serving as Director of the British Eugenics Society, and writing that eugenics is “the most important, significant and, I would add, genuine branch of sociology which exists”.
The 1913 Mental Deficiency Act proposed the mass segregation of the “feeble minded” from the rest of society.Sterilization programs were never legalized, although some were carried out in private upon the mentally ill by clinicians who were in favor of a more widespread eugenics plan.Indeed, those in support of eugenics shifted their lobbying of Parliament from enforced to voluntary sterilization, in the hope of achieving more legal recognition. But leave for the Labour Party Member of Parliament Major A. G. Church, to propose a Private Member’s Bill in 1931, which would legalize the operation for voluntary sterilization, was rejected by 167 votes to The limited popularity of eugenics in the UK was reflected by the fact that only two universities established courses in this field (University College London and Liverpool University). The Galton Institute, affiliated to UCL, was headed by Galton’s protégé, Karl Pearson.
United States (Read Carefully) One of the earliest modern advocates of eugenics (before it was labeled as such) was Alexander Graham Bell. In 1881 Bell investigated the rate of deafness on Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts. From this he concluded that deafness was hereditary in nature and, through noting that congenitally deaf parents were more likely to produce deaf children, tentatively suggested that couples where both were deaf should not marry, in his lecture Memoir upon the formation of a deaf variety of the human race presented to the National Academy of Sciences on 13 November 1883.However, it was his hobby of livestock breeding which led to his appointment to biologist David Starr Jordan‘s Committee on Eugenics, under the auspices of the American Breeders Association. The committee unequivocally extended the principle to man . (Human beings are considered livestock?)
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
United States – Eugenics Theory Cont’d – Read Carefully
Another scientist considered the “father of the American eugenics movement” was Charles Benedict Davenport.In 1904 he secured funding for the The Station for Experimental Evolution, later renamed the Carnegie Department of Genetics. It was also around that time that Davenport became actively involved with the American Breeders’ Association (ABA).
This led to Davenport’s first eugenics text, “The science of human improvement by better breeding”, one of the first papers to connect agriculture and human heredity.Davenport later went on to set up a Eugenics Record Office (ERO), collecting hundreds of thousands of medical histories from Americans, which many considered having a racist and anti- immigration agenda.Davenport and his views were supported at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory as late as 1963, when his views began to be de-emphasized (racism was no longer popular).
As the science continued in the 20th century, researchers interested in familial mental disorders conducted a number of studies to document the heritability of such illnesses as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression. Their findings were used by the eugenics movement as proof for its cause. State laws were written in the late 19th and early 20th centuries to prohibit marriage and force sterilization of the mentally ill in order to prevent the “passing on” of mental illness to the next generation. These laws were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1927 and were not abolished until the mid-20th century. All in all, 60,000 Americans were sterilized.
Beginning with Connecticut in 1896, many states enacted marriage laws with eugenic criteria, prohibiting anyone who was “epileptic, imbecile or feeble-minded” from marrying. In 1898 Charles B. Davenport, a prominent American biologist, began as director of a biological research station based in Cold Spring Harbor where he experimented with evolution in plants and animals. In 1904 Davenport received funds from the Carnegie Institution to found the Station for Experimental Evolution. The Eugenics Record Office (ERO) opened in 1910 while Davenport and Harry H. Laughlin began to promote eugenics.
The Immigration Restriction League(founded in 1894) was the first American entity associated officially with eugenics. The League sought to bar what it considered dysgenic members of certain races from entering America and diluting what it saw as the superior American racial stock through procreation. They lobbied for a literacy test for immigrants, based on the belief that literacy rates were low among “inferior races”. Literacy test bills were vetoed by Presidents in 1897, 1913 and 1915; eventually, President Wilson’s second veto was overruled by Congress in 1917.
Membership in the League included: A. Lawrence Lowell, president of Harvard, William DeWitt Hyde, president of Bowdoin College, James T. Young, director of Wharton School and David Starr Jordan, president of Stanford University. The League allied themselves with the American Breeder’s Association to gain influence and further its goals and in 1909 established a eugenics committee chaired by David Starr Jordan with members Charles Davenport, Alexander Graham Bell, Vernon Kellogg, Luther Burbank, William Earnest Castle, Adolf Meyer, H. J. Webber and Friedrich Woods.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
The ABA’s immigration legislation committee, formed in 1911 and headed by League’s founder Prescott F. Hall, formalized the committee’s already strong relationship with the Immigration Restriction League.
In years to come, the ERO collected a mass of family pedigrees and concluded that those who were unfit came from economically and socially poor backgrounds. Eugenicists such as Davenport, the psychologistHenry H. Goddard and the conservationist Madison Grant (all well respected in their time) began to lobby for various solutions to the problem of the “unfit”. (Davenport favored immigration restriction and sterilization as primary methods; Goddard favored segregation in his The Kallikak Family; Grant favored all of the above and more, even entertaining the idea of extermination.)Though their methodology and research methods are now understood as highly flawed, at the time this was seen as legitimate scientific research.It did, however, have scientific detractors (notably,Thomas Hunt Morgan, one of the few Mendelians to explicitly criticize eugenics), though most of these focused more on what they considered the crude methodology of eugenicists, and the characterization of almost every human characteristic as being hereditary, rather than the idea of eugenics itself.
Some states sterilized “imbeciles” for much of the 20th century. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1927 Buck v. Bell case that the state of Virginia could sterilize those it thought unfit. The most significant era of eugenic sterilization was between 1907 and 1963, when over 64,000 individuals were forcibly sterilized under eugenic legislation in the United States.A favorable report on the results of sterilization in California, the state with the most sterilizations by far, was published in book form by the biologist Paul Popenoe and was widely cited by the Nazi government as evidence that wide-reaching sterilization programs were feasible and humane.
Such legislation was passed in the U.S. because of widespread public acceptance of the eugenics movement, spearheaded by efforts of progressive reformers? (Why are these reformers killing humans? (Do they have the right to take or control a human life?)
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
Over 19 million people attended the Panama-Pacific International Exposition in San Francisco, open for 10 months from February 20 to December 4, 1915.The PPIE was a fair devoted to extolling the virtues of a rapidly progressing nation, featuring new developments in science, agriculture, manufacturing and technology. A subject that received a large amount of time and space was that of the developments concerning health and disease, particularly the areas of tropical medicine and race betterment (tropical medicine being the combined study of bacteriology, parasitology and entomology while racial betterment being the promotion of eugenic studies). Having these areas so closely intertwined, it seemed that they were both categorized in the main theme of the fair, the advancement of civilization. Thus in the public eye, the seemingly contradictory areas of study were both represented under progressive banners of improvement and were made to seem like plausible courses of action to better American society.
The state of California was at the vanguard of the American eugenics movement, performing about 20,000 sterilizations or one third of the 60,000 nationwide from 1909 up until the 1960s.By 1910, there was a large and dynamic network of scientists, reformers and professionals engaged in national eugenics projects and actively promoting eugenic legislation. The American Breeder’s Association was the first eugenic body in the U.S., established in 1906 under the direction of biologist Charles B. Davenport. The ABA was formed specifically to “investigate and report on heredity in the human race, and emphasize the value of superior blood and the menace to society of inferior blood”. Membership included Alexander Graham Bell, Stanford president David Starr Jordan and Luther Burbank.
When Nazi administrators went on trial for war crimes in Nuremberg after World War II, they justified the mass sterilizations (over 450,000 in less than a decade) by citing the United States as their inspiration.The Nazis had claimed American eugenicists inspired and supported Hitler’s racial purification laws, and failed to understand the connection between those policies and the eventual genocide of the Holocaust. (Is this why German Pharmaceutical companies are now the top Pharmaceutical, Biotech and Agricultural giants in America?)
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
A pedigree chart from The Kallikak Family shows how one illicit tryst could lead to an entire generation of imbeciles? (How do you decipher a human imbecile?) The idea of “genius” and “talent” is also considered by William Graham Sumner, a founder of the American Sociological Society (now called the American Sociological Association). He maintained that if the government did not meddle with the social policy of laissez-faire, a class of genius would rise to the top of the system of social stratification, followed by a class of talent.
Most of the rest of society would fit into the class of mediocrity. Those who were considered to be defective (mentally retarded, handicapped, etc.) had a negative effect on social progress by draining off necessary resources. They should be left on their own to sink or swim. But those in the class of delinquent (criminals, deviants, etc.) should be eliminated from society (“Folkways”, 1907). (Compare to ideals in Plato‘s Republic.)
However, methods of eugenics were applied to reformulate more restrictive definitions of white racial purity in existing state laws banning interracial marriage: the so-called anti-miscegenation laws. The most famous example of the influence of eugenics and its emphasis on strict racial segregation on such “anti-miscegenation” legislation was Virginia’s Racial Integrity Act of 1924. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned this law in 1967 in Loving v. Virginia, and declared anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
With the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, eugenicists for the first time played an important role in the Congressional debate as expert advisers on the threat of “inferior stock” from eastern and southern Europe.This reduced the number of immigrants from abroad to 15 percent from previous years, to control the number of “unfitindividuals entering the country. While eugenicists did support the act, the most important backers were union leaders like Samuel GompersThe new act, inspired by the eugenic belief in the racial superiority of “old stock” white Americans as members of the “Nordic race” (a form of white supremacy), strengthened the position of existing laws prohibiting race-mixing.Eugenic considerations also lay behind the adoption of incest laws in much of the U.S. and were used to justify many anti-miscegenation laws.
During the early 20th century, the United States and Canada began to receive far higher numbers of Southern and Eastern European immigrants. Influential eugenicists like Lothrop Stoddard and Harry Laughlin (who was appointed as an expert witness for the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization in 1920) presented arguments they would pollute the national gene pool if their numbers went unrestricted. It has been argued that this stirred both Canada and the United States into passing laws creating a hierarchy of nationalities, rating them from the most desirable Anglo-Saxon and Nordic peoples to the Chinese and Japanese immigrants, who were almost completely banned from entering the country.
However, several people, in particular Franz Samelson, Mark Snydermanand Richard Herrnstein, have argued, based on their examination of the records of the congressional debates over immigration policy, Congress gave virtually no consideration to these factors. According to these authors, the restrictions were motivated primarily by a desire to maintain the country’s cultural integrity against the heavy influx of foreigners.
In the USA, eugenic supporters included Theodore Roosevelt,Research was funded by distinguished philanthropies and carried out at prestigious universities.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
It was taught in college and high school classrooms. Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood of America to urge the legalization of contraception or poor, immigrant women.In its time eugenics was touted by some as scientific and progressive,the natural application of knowledge about breeding to the arena of human life. Before the realization of death camps in World War II, the idea that eugenics would lead to genocide was not taken seriously by the average American.
These horrific actions are crime against humanity and unconstitutional, No other human being has the right to control or take another human beings life, all humans have the right to Life! Why do these reformers feel the need to control the human population? Who commanded these groups to do this? Why is it their personal concern? How does the human population affect their families, political agenda’s, countries, businesses, or corporation’s?Why are these reformers concerned with womens reproductive health? Why are these groups attacking the disabled, and feel the need to sterilize the poor ? Do these groups realize America and many other countries are now diverse? Are these groups using eugenics methods through the pharmaceutical, food and economic resources to control the American and World population?
Rockefeller Foundation in Brazil – In the first decades of the twentieth century, the work of the Rockefeller Foundation was decisive for the implementation of public health initiatives in Brazil, especially in the so-called public health movement. At that time, Brazilian eugenics was the same as public health, as expressed in the maxim “to sanitize is to eugenize”.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
In Canada, the eugenics movement gained support early in the 20th century as prominent physicians drew a direct link between heredity and public health.Eugenics was enforced by law in two Canadian provinces. In Alberta, the Sexual Sterilization Act was enacted in 1928, focusing the movement on the sterilization of mentally deficient individuals, as determined by the Alberta Eugenics Board. The campaign to enforce this action was backed by groups such as the United Farm Women’s Group, including key member Emily Murphy.
As in many other former British Empire colonies, eugenic policies were linked to racist (and racialist) agendas pursued by various levels of government, such as the forced sterilization of Canada’s indigenous peoples and specific provincial government initiatives, such as Alberta’s eugenics program. As a brief illustration, in 1928 the province of Alberta started an initiative, “…allowing any inmate of a native residential school to be sterilized upon the approval of the school Principal. At least 3,500 Indian women are sterilized under this law.”As of 2011, research into extant archival records of sterilization and direct killing of First Nations youth (through intentional transmission of disease and other means) under the residential school program is ongoing.
(Isn’t this a inhumane crime against children?)
As a result, many of those sterilized under the Sexual Sterilization Act were immigrants who were unfairly categorized.The province of British Columbia enacted its own Sexual Sterilization Act in 1933. As in Alberta, the British Columbia Eugenics Board could recommend the sterilization of those it considered to be suffering from “mental disease or mental deficiency”.
Although not enforced by laws as it was in Canada’s western provinces, an obscenity trial in Depression-era Ontario, can be seen as an example of the influence of eugenics in Ontario. Dorothea Palmer, a nurse working for the Parents Information Bureau – a privately funded birth control organization based out of Kitchener, Ontario – was arrested in the predominantly Catholic community of Eastview, Ontario in 1936. She was accused of illegally providing birth control materials and knowledge to her clients, primarily poor women.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
The defense at her trial was mounted by an industrialist and influential eugenicist from Kitchener, A.R. Kaufman. Palmer was acquitted in early 1937. The trial lasted less than a year, and later became known as The Eastview Birth Control Trial, demonstrating the influence of the eugenics lobby in Ontario.
The popularity of the eugenics movement peaked during the Depression when sterilization was widely seen as a way of relieving society of the financial burdens imposed by defective individuals.Although the eugenics excesses of Nazi Germany diminished the popularity of the eugenics movement, the Sexual Sterilization Acts of Alberta and British Columbia were not repealed until 1972.
Germany Eugenics – Read Carefully
Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitlerwas well known for eugenics programs which attempted to maintain a “pure” Aryan race through a series of programs that ran under the banner of racial hygiene. Among other activities, the Nazis performed extensive experimentation on live human beings to test their genetic theories, ranging from simple measurement of physical characteristics to the research for Otmar von Verschuer carried out by Karin Magnussen using “human material” gathered by Josef Mengele on twins and others at Auschwitz death camp.
During the 1930s and 1940s, the Nazi regime used forced sterilization on hundreds of thousands of people whom they viewed as mentally and physically unfit, an estimated 400,000 between 1934 and 1937. The scale of the Nazi program prompted one American eugenics advocate to seek an expansion of their program, with one complaining that “the Germans are beating us at our own game.”
The Nazis went further, however, murdering tens of thousands of the institutionalized disabled through compulsory “euthanasia” programs such as Aktion T4. They used gas chambers and lethal injections to murder their victims.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
They also implemented a number of “positive” eugenics policies, giving awards to Aryan women who had large numbers of children and encouraged a service in which “racially pure” single women could deliver illegitimate children. Allegations that such women were also impregnated by SS officers in the Lebensborn were not proven at the Nuremberg trials, but new evidence (and the testimony of Lebensborn children) has established more details about Lebensborn practices. Also, “racially valuable” children from occupied countries were forcibly removed from their parents and adopted by German people. Many of their concerns for eugenics and racial hygiene were also explicitly present in their systematic killing of millions of “undesirable” people, especially Jews who were singled out for the Final Solution, this policy led to the horrors seen in the Holocaust.
The scope and coercion involved in the German eugenics programs along with a strong use of the rhetoric of eugenics and so-called “racial science” throughout the regime created an indelible cultural association between eugenics and the Third Reich in the post-war years.
Two scholars, John Glad and Seymour W. Itzkoff of Smith College, have questioned the relation between eugenics and the Holocaust. They argue that, contrary to popular belief, Hitler did not regard the Jews as intellectually inferior and did not send them to the concentration camps on these grounds. They argue that Hitler had different reasons for his genocidal policies toward the Jews.Seymour W. Itzkoff writes that the Holocaust was “a vast dysgenic program to rid Europe of highly intelligent challengers to the existing Christian domination by a numerically and politically minuscule minority”. Therefore, according to Itzkoff, “the Holocaust was the very antithesis of eugenic practice”.
The ideas of eugenics and race were used, in part, as justification for German colonial expansion throughout the world. Germany, as well as Great Britain, sought to seize the colonial territories of other ‘dying’ empires which could no longer protect their possessions. Examples included China, the Portuguese Empire, the Spanish Empire, the Dutch Empire and the Danish Empire. (Germany is now in control of many American top pharmaceutical, biotech and agricultural, corporation’s which is a direct relation to Eugenics Theories and practices?)
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
“Thus the colonies Germany required for her bursting population, as markets for her overproductive industries and sources of vital raw materials, and as symbols of her world power would simply have to be taken from weaker nations, so the pan-Germans asserted publicly and the German government believed secretly.(Very Concerning!)
The 1918 British “Bluebook” documented the genocide that took place at Shark Island Extermination Camp and Windhoek Concentration Camp, including photographs.The Bluebook was used as a negotiating tool by the British at the end of World War I to gain control of what had been German Southwest Africa, after Germany was defeated.
Skulls of the Herero were collected from Rehoboth, Namibia in about 1904, for the purpose of demonstrating the supposed physical inferiority of these people. The Kaiser Wilhelm Institute used the Herero skulls by 1928.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
The physical anthropologists used measurements of skull capacity, etc., in an attempt to prove that Jews, Blacks and Italians were inherently “inferior” to Whites. Examples of such activity were found from about 1928 at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics. This contrasted with a lot of 19th century German anthropology which was generally more cosmopolitan.
Rita Hauschild, a doctoral student and then staff member of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Human Heredity, Anthropology, and Eugenics, carried out “bastard studies“, anthropometric studies of mixed-heritage populations in Trinidad and Venezuela, in pursuit of the Nazi doctrine of “racial hygiene”. Her research was at first confined to Tovar, Venezuela, a former German colony, and was extended to Trinidad with support from the UK Foreign Office.
The populations studied, in 1935 to 1937, were “Chinese-Negro hybrids” in Trinidad, “Chinese-Indian” and “Chinese-Negro” “hybrids” in Venezuela.In addition, Johannes Schaeuble engaged in “bastard studies” in Chile. However, German historical foundations to colonies in the “New World have a long history”.
In the early part of the Shōwa era, Japanese governments executed a eugenic policy to limit the birth of children with “inferior” traits, as well as aiming to protect the life and health of mothers. The Race Eugenic Protection Law was submitted from 1934 to 1938 to the Diet. After four amendments, this draft was promulgated as the National Eugenic Law in 1940 by the Konoegovernment.
According to the Eugenic Protection Law (1948), sterilization could be enforced on criminals “with genetic predisposition to commit crime”, patients with genetic diseases such as total color-blindness, hemophilia,albinism and ichthyosis, and mental affections such as schizophrenia, and manic-depressives, and those with epilepsy.Mental illnesses were added in 1952.
The Leprosy Prevention laws of 1907, 1931 and 1953, the last one only repealed in 1996, permitted the segregation of patients in sanitariums where forced abortions and sterilization were common, even if the laws did not refer to it, and authorized punishment of patients “disturbing peace”, as most Japanese leprologists believed that vulnerability to the disease was inheritable.There were a few Japanese leprologists such as Noburo Ogasawara who argued against the “isolation-sterilization policy” but he was denounced as a traitor to the nation at the 15th conference of the Japanese Association of Leprology in 1941.
One of the last eugenic measures of the Shōwa regime was taken by the Higashikuni government. On 19 August 1945, the Home Ministry ordered local government offices to establish a prostitution service for allied soldiers to preserve the “purity” of the “Japanese race”. The official declaration stated: “Through the sacrifice of thousands of “Okichis” of the Shōwa era, we shall construct a dike to hold back the mad frenzy of the occupation troops and cultivate and preserve the purity of our race long into the future…”
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
Early in the Japanese administration of Korea, staff at the Japanese Association of Leprology attempted to discourage marriage between Japanese women and Korean men who had been recruited from the peninsula as laborers following its annexation by Japan in 1910. In 1942, a survey report argued that “the Korean laborers brought to Japan… are of the lower classes and therefore of inferior constitution… By fathering children with Japanese women, these men could lower the caliber of the Yamato minzoku“.
However, eugenics pioneer Unno Kōtoku of Ryukyu University influentially argued based on heterosis in plants that exclusive Japanese endogamy might cause “degeneration” of the Japanese race. Since he regarded intermarriage with white or black people as “disastrous”, he advocated intermarriage with Koreans, whose “inferior” physical characteristics would be subsumed by the “superior” Japanese, according to his thinking.Japanese-Korean intermarriage was promoted by the government in Korea using serological studies that claimed to prove that Japanese and Koreans had the same pure ancestral origin.
After independence in the late 1940s, both North and South Korea continued to perpetuate the idea of an ethnically homogeneous Korean nation based on a divine single bloodline.This “pure-blood-ism” (순혈주의) is a source of pride for many Koreans, and informs Korean nationalism, politics, and foreign relations.
Eugenics was one of many ideas and programs debated in the 1920s and 1930s in Republican China, as a means of improving society and raising China’s stature in the world. The principal Chinese proponent of eugenics was the prominent sociologist Pan Guangdan, and a significant number of intellectuals entered into the debate, including Gao Xisheng, biologist Zhou Jianren, sociologist Chen Da, and Chen Jianshan, and many others.Chen Da is notable for the link he provides to the family planning policy and One Child Policy enacted in China after the establishment of the People’s Republic of China.
In Sweden, the Sterilization Act of 1934 provided for the voluntary sterilization of some mental patients. The law was passed while the Swedish Social Democratic Party was in power, though it was also supported by all other political parties in Parliament at the time, as well as the Lutheran Church and much of the medical profession.From about 1934 to 1975, Sweden sterilized more than 62,000 people.
In absolute figures, Sweden sterilized more people than any other European state except for Nazi Germany. More people were sterilized in 1948 than any other year. However, Finland (headquarters of many international pharmaceutical companies?) has sterilized the most per capita of the Nordic countries, and California sterilized approximately the same percentage.
Sweden’s large-scale eugenics program targeted the deviant and the mentally ill. Most sterilizations were “voluntary” (voluntary does not necessarily mean free from persuasion or exhortation). The Swedish government inquiry found that about 30,000 of the 62,000 were sterilized under some form of pressure or coercion.
Implanon Pharmceutical History – Links & Information
Sweden Eugenics Theory
As was the case in other programs, ethnicity and race were believed to be connected to mental and physical health. The Swedish government inquiry denied that the Swedish sterilisation program targeted ethnic minorities, but did not provide any evidence for this. The Swedish government’s claims are contradicted by the experiences recounted by Swedish gypsies and travelers.
There is proof that the program targeted women. The goal of the program was to decrease deviant offspring. If one member of a family was considered deviant the whole family became the target of an investigation. It was perceived to be easier to persuade a woman to be sterilized than it was to persuade a man. For this reason women were more often sterilized than men, despite the fact that the medical procedure involved in the sterilization was simpler to carry out on a man.
Even as recently as 1996, the Swedish government rejected paying compensation to those who had been sterilized. Following a 1997 series of articles by the Polish-born journalist Maciej Zaremba, in Sweden’s largest daily Dagens Nyheter, the issue of compensation for the victims was brought to Swedish and international attention. In 1999, the Swedish government began paying compensation of US$21,000 to the sterilized (and their families) who had “not consented” and had applied for compensation.
Singapore, practiced a limited form of eugenics that involved discouraging marriage between university graduates and non-graduates through segregation in matchmaking agencies, in the hope that the former would produce better children; and paid incentives for the uneducated to undergo sterilisation, among other procedures. The government introduced the “Graduate Mother Scheme” in the early 1980s to entice graduate women with incentives to get married, which was eventually scrapped due to public criticism and the implications it had on meritocracy.
Listing of additional countries who are using Eugenics Theory
Other countries that adopted some form of eugenics program at one time include Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland with programs to sterilize people the government declared to be mentally deficient.
Eugenics conclusion:There are only a few words to say about these disturbing finding that are impacting human lives, by other private hidden agenda’s! This theory clearly constitutes private calculated criminal conspiracies against humanity by elite American and Non-American reformers, or other international countries who have something to gain by utilizing this theory.
In America the theory violates the United State’s constitution, harming American citizens human lives, for sole international world take-over purposes. One could say this is being currently driven in the United States by Pharmaceutical Industry, Agricultural, Chemical, Pesticides, Animal breeders, etc., the theory of current human genocide is very disturbing, and should be to all human beings of all races. Below are additional links to this theory and some of the party’s involved.
To think this research started with Bayer Healthcare – Mirena – Iud which opened up this terrible finding of planned deaths by elite human reformers which includes, John D. Rockefeller III.
“The research of Bayer AG will end with – Comité European de Normalisation & Leiras Oy”
Comité European de Normalisation– At the introduction pg. 1 you reviewed;
In 1996, ISO and CEN joined forces to create the first version of ISO 14155, which repeated EN 540 standards. Almost immediately, the two organizations formed parallel working groups (WGs) to expand the standard. WG4 of ISO’s TC (technical committee) 194 developed more elaborate general requirements in ISO 14155 part 1, while CEN’s WG elaborated part 2, requirements for the clinical investigation plan. In 2003, the organizations published both. (Why would a international foundation be able to pass a American based ISO standards for American citizens?)
European Committee for Standardization
CEN, the European Committee for Standardization, is an association that brings together the National Standardization Bodies of 33 European countries.
CEN is one of three European Standardization Organizations (together with CENELEC and ETSI) that have been officially recognized by the European Union and by the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) as being responsible for developing and defining voluntary standards at European level. CEN provides a platform for the development of European Standards and other technical documents in relation to various kinds of products, materials, services and processes. CEN supports standardization activities in relation to a wide range of fields and sectors including: air and space, chemicals, construction, consumer products, defense and security, energy, the environment, food and feed, health and safety, healthcare, ICT, machinery, materials, pressure equipment, services, smart living, transportand packaging.
Is the American government aware of this?) Are American, healthcare organizations and agencies aware of these published ISO standards created by a European non profit organization?
European Standards (ENs) are based on a consensus, which reflects the economic and social interests of 33 CEN Member countries channeled through their National Standardization Organizations. Most standards are initiated by industry. Other standardization projects can come from consumers, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) or associations, or even European legislators.
Besides European Standards, CEN produces other reference documents, which can be developed quickly and easily: Technical Specifications, Technical Reports and Workshop Agreements. Standards are being developed in Europe, and in which fields standardization work is carried out, as well as explains how we support legislation.
http://www.wasis.eu/About/Consortium/ComiteEuropeendeNormalisation.aspx – The European Committee for Standardization (CEN) is a business catalyst in Europe, removing trade barriers for European stakeholders such as industry, public administration, service providers, consumers and other stakeholders. Its mission is to foster the European economy in global trading, the welfare of European citizens, and the environment. (Using American citizens and weakening the America’s economy?)
The role of CEN is to ensure the best chances for the exploitation of the results of the research, through the drafting of a new standardization document, in general in the form of a CWA (CEN Workshop Agreement), through a structure called a “CEN Workshop”.
Through its services CEN provides a platform for the development of European Standards and other specifications. CEN’s 31 National Members work together to develop voluntary European Standards (ENs) in various sectors to build a European Internal Market for goods and services and to position Europe in the global economy. By supporting research, and helping disseminate innovation, standards are a powerful tool for economic growth. More than 60.000 technical experts as well as business federations, consumer and other societal interest organizations are involved in the CEN network that reaches over 480 million people.
The European Committee for Standardization (CEN, French: Comité Européen de Normalisation) is a non-profit organisation whose mission is to foster the European economy in global trading, the welfare of European citizens and the environment by providing an efficient infrastructure to interested parties for the development, maintenance and distribution of coherent sets of standards and specifications.
The CEN was founded in 1961. Its thirty national members work together to develop European Standards (ENs) in various sectors to build a European internal market for goods and services and to position Europe in the global economy. CEN is officially recognized as a European standards body by the European Union; the other official European standards bodies are the European Committee for Electro technical Standardization (CENELEC) and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI
European Committee for Standardization – Cont’d
The standardization bodies of the thirty national members represent the twenty seven member states of the European Union, three countries of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and countries which are likely to join the EU or EFTA in the future. CEN is contributing to the objectives of the European Union and European Economic Area with technical standards (EN standards) which promote free trade, the safety of workers and consumers, interoperability of networks, environmental protection, exploitation of research and development programs, and public procurement. An example of mandatory standards are those for materials and products used in construction and listed under the Construction Products Directive. The CE mark is a declaration by the manufacturer that a product complies with the respective EU directive and hence the harmonized standard(s) referenced by the directive(s).
CEN (together with CENELEC) owns the Keymark, a voluntary quality mark for products and services. A product bearing the Keymark demonstrates conformity to European Standards. (How can these organization’s or foundations have authority to implement standards in the United States for the American people?) This is a violation of the U.S. Constitution developed by American Forefathers?)
Leiras is a part of Takeda Group which is the 12th biggest pharmaceutical company in the world. Takeda operates in over 70 countries. Our name in Finland is Leiras Takeda. We joined Takeda Group in September 2011, when Takeda bought Nycomed, the previous parent company of Leiras.
The new Leiras Takeda is the most Finnish international pharmaceutical company in the world. Takeda’s and Leiras’ merger combine the Japanese perseverance and commitment in work with the long-term Finnish expertise in pharmaceuticals. Takeda’s roots go back 230 years.
The basis of our innovative operations is groundbreaking research and development. Takeda invests over 20% of its revenues in research and development. Takeda is the largest pharmaceutical company in Japan and a significant company globally that promotes patient health through leading pharmaceutical innovations.
Leiras Oy & Additional Research References
PCAS Finland Oy – Reliable API Partner -PCAS Finland Oy has produced APIs since 1960, and it was the first company to produce active pharmaceutical ingredients in commercial quantities in Finland. Until June 2001, PCAS Finland Oy was an integral part of Leiras Oy, a Finnish pharmaceutical company, providing active pharmaceutical ingredients for pharmaceutical companies worldwide. As of July 1st 2001, Leiras Oy spun off the fine chemicals operations into a separate company and started co-operation with the French company PCAS S.A. The fine chemicals business was transferred to Leiras Fine Chemicals Oy, a joint venture between Schering Oy and PCAS S.A. As of February 28,2003, Leiras Fine Chemicals Oy changed its name to PCAS Finland Oy, and on June 18, 2004, PCAS Finland Oy became a 100% owned subsidiary of PCAS S.A. Figures 2011 Annual sales: EUR 19,7 million
Leiras Finland Oy Ab in Consumer Health … Takeda Pharmaceutical identifies potential top products in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals throughout the world, …
Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. LTD. CTIS Ethicon … GlaxoSmithKline Inter National Medical Center of Japan Leiras Oy Leo Pharma Lundbeck Novartis Nycomed Russia …
api-data.com/base/?id=10293
Product Name: Salbutamol: Chemical Formula: C13H21N1O3: CAS: 18559-94-9: Manufacture: HUHTAMAKI OY LEIRAS PHARMACEUTICALS: Synthetic route patent …
Takeda is a research-based global pharmaceutical company. As the largest pharmaceutical company in Japan and one of the global leaders of the industry. Takeda…
www.takeda.us
Striving toward better health for people worldwide through leading innovation in medicine. As a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited …
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takeda_Pharmaceuticals
Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited (武田薬品工業株式会社, Takeda Yakuhin Kōgyō Kabushiki-gaisha ?) is the largest pharmaceutical company in Japan and …
www.takeda.com/company – Takeda is a research-based global pharmaceutical company. Takeda is committed to striving toward better health for individuals and progress in medicine by developing …
Inspired Hitler’s Master Race – In 1937, the American Eugenics Society issued statements of praise for the work that the Nazis were doing to cleanse the gene pool. For them, the scale on which the Nazis were carrying out their mass sterilization was what they had wanted for America. Original writings of eugenic supporters spoke of cleansing the American population by methods ranging from gas chambers to simply leaving the lower classes to the mercy of the elements or to disease; they went on to lament that American society wasn’t ready for such a wide-spread, sweeping cleanse and saluted the Nazis for doing exactly what they had wanted for their own country. Hitler’s fondness for the theories and science behind American eugenics was clear; he would not only quote American texts, but use them as evidence to support his madness and to recruit others to his cause.
Pioneered By A Stanford Professor – One of the founding members of the Eugenics Committee of the American Breeders Association and the Eugenics Record Office. Chief among his beliefs was that the upper class of America was being constantly eroded by the lower class, and that careful, selective breeding would be necessary to preserve the country’s upper crust
Better Babies and Fitter Families Contest – Mothers were encouraged to bring their babies to fair judging contests, and in much the same way as livestock was judged, babies would be judged on things like health, weight, and size. This evolved into Fitter Families, a contest where whole families would present judges not only with their happy, healthy babies, but with an abbreviated version of their racial pedigree
The Immigration Problems – Those that supported eugenics looked to immigrants as a problem variable that was introducing all sorts of new and undesirable genetic qualities into the American gene pool.
EUGENICS FACTS CONT’D
10 Horrifying Facts About American Eugenics
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory -The Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory is still around, located in Cold Spring Harbor, New York. Now, it’s a research facility in the fields of neuroscience, plant biology, quantitative biology, and, not surprisingly, genomics. The Eugenics Record Office kept detailed family records that allowed field workers to trace cases of mental and physical defects through a family line. Conducted studies on the importance of other inherited traits, such as hair and eye color, hair texture, and skin pigments. In addition to physical traits, they also tried to document how chronic diseases such as hemophilia and mental disorders like schizophrenia, along with what they called “feeble-mindedness,” were passed through a family.
The Racial Integrity Act – The purpose was to document the race of every person in the state, allowing for a massive genetic database to be created. The database was necessary for the rest of the law—making sure that someone whose heritage was purely white married only another similarly pure person. State Registrars were forbidden from issuing a marriage license unless the man and the woman in question could both produce such a certificate stating that there was no trace of any race other than Caucasian in their ancestry. If caught lying 1yr., in jail
Supported By Alexander Graham Bell and The Rockefellers – Alexander Graham Bell was a staunch supporter of the movement, and thought that deaf people should not be allowed to marry. Many eugenics projects got their financing from some of the corporate moguls of the day, including the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Harriman railroad conglomerate. In fact, the Carnegies founded and funded the Cold Spring Harbor research facility, one of the largest centers of eugenics activities (more on that in a minute). And it was the Rockefellers who put up the money behind a branch of eugenics in Europe—that was a German branch that counted Joseph Mengele in its ranks. They also funded organizations like the German Psychiatric Institute, which in turn gave rise to one of Hitler’s most instrumental minds in medical repression, Ernst Rudin. The United States Supreme Court was also on board, upholding the laws of the eugenics movement, and one of the leaders of the American eugenic movement, Madison Grant, received a fan letter from none other than Adolf Hitler, praising his work as inspiring. While much of the financial support of families like the Rockefellers ended before the official beginning of World War II, they had already helped set things in motion.
10 Horrifying Facts About American Eugenics
Feeble-Minded, Disabilities, Deaf, Orphans -The American eugenics movement had a very specific desire when it came to creating the perfect, pure race. Not only were they tall, intelligent, and talented, but they were blond-haired and blue-eyed. Sound familiar? It was described as a “Nordic” race in America, and it was the Aryan race in Germany. While Alexander Graham Bell targeted the deaf, and laws on the whole targeted the sexually deviant offenders and the mentally ill, there was another sub-group who fell victim to the forced sterilization procedures. In California, all it took was a doctor to deem you “unworthy” to have the procedure done. And in some cases—as late as 1963—that could simply mean you were an orphan. Men like California’s Charlie Follett were sterilized against their will as children; Follett’s only crime was to be born to alcoholic parents who could not support him, leaving him a ward of the state.
30 States and 60,000 Victims – At the height of the movement, 30 states had adopted legislation that legalized the sterilization of individuals deemed unfit for reproduction. In most states, that meant the mentally ill or mentally deficient. By the time all was said and done, somewhere in the neighborhood of 60,000 people had been forcefully sterilized in state-sanctioned procedures. In some states, such as California, sterilization records are incomplete or often altered, making it impossible to truly know how many people were subjected to the procedures. It was done to men and women, Caucasians as well as individual from other and mixed races. State laws in California included permissions for those who were in prisons to be eligible for sterilization, as well as those found to have any chance of carrying hereditary dementia or insanity. The laws also removed the patients’ rights to contest the procedure, although it was still necessary for parents to consent to the sterilization of their minor children. In the years between 1921 and 1950, roughly 450 people were sterilized in California each year.
What It Means -The American Eugenics Society was an organization that began in the United States in the early 1900s. Its mission included not just segregation, but a racial cleansing and the establishment of a strong, pure race untainted by the blood of those that were deemed lesser, whether by race or by disability. That meant the practice of forced sterilization for those who were deemed unfit to have a family, such as those with learning disabilities or those in institutions. It also meant forbidding interracial marriage and, as we’ll cover, the forced sterilization of orphans, cripples, and the “feeble-minded. Sir Francis Dalton theorized that if only the best and the brightest married each other and bore children, it would elevate the human race. And in America, a country still torn by racial tensions and the reminders of a Civil War and the end of slavery, it was exactly the sort of thing those self-proclaimed best and brightest could seize upon.
Willet M. Haysfounded the American Breeders’ Association (ABA) in 1903. Hays was the first president of the ABA, a position he kept for ten years. He formulated the three objectives of the organization: “(1) Determine the laws of inheritance in animals and plants. Learn the application of these laws to increase the intrinsic commercial and artistic values of living things. (3) Aid in bringing about this desired improvement through associated effort.”The ABA published the American Breeders’ Magazine from 1910-13. In 1915 the ABA was renamed and reorganized as the American Genetic Association
The American Breeders Association, founded in 1903, was the first scientific organization in the U.S. to recognize the importance of Mendel’s Laws and to support eugenic research. At the first annual meeting in St Louis, University of Missouri Professor of Agriculture Fredrick B. Mumford became one of the Association’s first officers.
The fifth annual meeting of the American Breeders Association was held during Farmers’ Week at the University of Missouri in January of 1909.
Taskforce on the ERC’s future (2011) – In December 2010, the European Commission set up a Task Force to look into the future of the ERC’s governance. With the new negotiations of the future research framework Horizon 2020 in sight, it was timely to identify what was the best structure for the ERC.
The Taskforce also built on the 2009 major review conducted by an external panel of experts that took stock of the ERC’s structure and mechanisms after its first years of operations and that specifically called for a follow-up review two years on. The Task Force was set up at the request of the ERC Scientific Council, as announced in its statement in November 2010.
Founded in 2000 Eurice provides comprehensive support services for the planning, initiation, and implementation of large international collaborative R&D projects. Today, we are among Germany’s largest project management offices, based in Saarbrücken with a new branch office in Berlin from 2014. A dedicated team of over 30 staff members with different professional and scientific expertise, accompanies researchers and innovative companies through the entire life cycle of a project – from the very first idea to successful project completion
Research Conclusion & Questions
DISTURBING Revelations Against Human Lives?
HUMAN BEINGS ARE NOT HERDS OF CATTLE? CATTLE HAS 4 LEGS HUMANS HAVE 2 LEGS?
THE ENTIRE CONTROL FACTOR OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY, BIOTECH AND AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY, THE EUGENIC’S POPULATION CONTROL
WOMEN ARE BEING STERILIZED IF THEY ARE DEEMED TO BE UNFIT MOTHERS?
IS THIS WHY SOME WOMEN WEREN’T ABLE REPRODUCE?
WERE WOMEN PREVIOUSLY STERILIZED WITHOUT THEM KNOWING?
OR VICE VERSA FOR MEN WHO WEREN’T SEEN FIT TO PRODUCE?
CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES ARE NOT FIT TO LIVE IN THE WORLD AND CONSIDERED IMBECILES?
IS THIS THE NEW WORLD ORDER – DEATH BY POPULATION
ELITE (LIVE) – GOOD ANIMAL REPRODUCTIVE GENES
POOR (DIE) – BAD ANIMAL REPRODUCTIVE GENES
IS EUGENICS IN PLACE IN AMERICA BY ELITE LEADERS AND CORPORATIONS WHO ARE OF AMERICAN AND MANY INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES – WHOM ARE KILLING OFF HUMAN BEINGS THAT THEY DO NOT SEE FIT FOR LIVING?
WHY ARE UNITED STATES TOP PHARMACEUTICAL AND BIOTECH COMPANIES OWNED BY MANY INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES, MAINLY GERMAN, EUROPEAN WHO BELIEVE IN THE EUGENICIS THEORY, SINCE ADOLF HITLER?
WHY ARE HUMAN BEINGS CONSIDERED CATTLE TO ANOTHER HUMAN BEING WHO IS OF THE SAME BEING? DOES THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT’ KNOW ABOUT THESE PRIVATE EUGENIC HORRIFIC THEORIES AND LEADERS?
IS THE U.S. GOVERNMENT USING THIS THEORY ON AMERICAN CITIZENS VIA PHARMACEUTICAL – FOOD – CHEMICAL – GAS INDUSTRY?
Research Conclusion & Questions
WHY DID HW BUSH PUT IN PLACE EB-5 TO OPEN UP IMMIGRATION FOR THIS TO OCCUR? TO KILL OFF THE AMERICAN POPULATION FOR THE INTERNATIONAL’S LEADERS?
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INTERNATIONAL TREATIES, INTERNATIONAL BUINSESS OWNERSHIP, AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS, HUMANITARIAN RIGHTS, FREE TRADE, ISO STANDARDS?
WHY ARE INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES INTERESTED IN AMERICAN CITIZENS. WHY ARE THEY WATCHING OUR FAMILIES, LIVES, MEDICAL HISTORIES ETC..
IS EVERY AMERICAN FAMILY A WALKING TARGET?
WHO IS HERE TO SAVE WOMEN AND CHILDREN’S LIVES?
WILL THERE BE A NEXT GENERATION FOR THE NATUALIZED CITIZENS OF AMERICA?
WHY IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY MEMBERS OF THESE EUROPEAN ORGANIZATIONS?
WHY ARE THESE ORGANIZATIONS PUBLICALY FUNDED BY AMERICA?
HOW CAN A FOUNDATION AND CORPORATIONS BE IN CONTROL OF THE HUMAN POPULATION?
WHY IS IT IMPORTANT FOR THE AGING ELITE TO CONTROL THE WAY OF THE HUMAN POPULATION?
WHY DO THE ELITE FEEL IT BE NECESSARY TO TAKE A HUMAN LIFE?
WHY ARE WOMEN, CHILDREN, POOR, AND THE DISABLED TARGETED?
ARE THESE ORGANIZATIONS WORKING TOGETHER?
ARE THE INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES TRYING TO PURPOSELY KILL OFF THE AMERICAN POPULATION TO TAKE CONTROL OF AMERICA?
WHY ARE THERE SO MANY LAWSUITS AGAINST INTERNATIONAL PHARMACEUTICAL AND OTHER INT’L COMPANIES IN AMERICA?
Research Conclusion & Questions
WHY ARE INTERNATIONAL PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES DOING MULTIPLE-MEGERS TO TAKE OVER AMERCAN CORPORATIONS?
HOW ARE INTERNATIONAL COMPANIES FUDING THESE MULTIPLE-MERGERS?
IS THIS A DIRECT ATTACK AGAINST THE AMERICAN POPULATION?
WHY IS A WOMEN’S NATURAL REPRODUCTIVE ORGANS BEING ALTERED?
PLEASE READ AND PASS ON TO EVERY AMERICAN CITIZENS TO SAVE AMERICA AND EVERY AMERICAN FAMILY IN THE UNITED STATE’S.
WHO WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR KILLING MANY HUMAN BEINGS?
WHY IS THE UNITES STATES SUPREME COURT AGREEING TO KILLING OFF THE AMERICAN POPULATION THEY SEE UNFIT TO LIVE?
WHY ARE POOR PEOPLE BEING TARGETED DIRECTLY?
WHO GAVE ANOTHER HUMAN BEING THE RIGHT TO TAKE ANOTHER HUMAN BEINGS LIFE BASED ON THEIR FAMILY GENE POOL?
IS THEIR SUCH A THING CALLED “RIGHT TO LIVE”?
WHY IS THE GOVERNMENT NOT NOTICED THE EUGENIC’S THEORY?
WHO IS REALLY IN CONTROL OF AMERICA?
DO INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES HAVE MORE RIGHTS IN AMERICAN THAN NATURALIZED AMERICAN CITIZENS?
ARE THE INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES MAKING AMERICA WEAK, BY RUNNING TOP CORPORATIONS AND BUSINESSES.
WHY DO INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES HAVE AMERICAN-BASED BUSINESSES, AND OPERATE AND MAKE DECISIONS FROM THEIR HOME COUNTRY?
WHY ARE THEY SO MANY INTERNATIONAL PHARMACEUTICAL SUBSIDIARIES?
WHO WILL STAND UP AND SAVE MILLIONS OF LIVES?
Research Conclusion & Questions
WHY DON’T WOMEN HAVE THE RIGHT TO FREELY REPRODUCE IN AMERICA?
WHY ARE HUMAN BEING BE COMPARED TO AS HERDS OF CATTLE?
WHY IS AMERICA AND/OR INTERNATIONAL COUNTRIES ENACTING ADOLF
Who is monitoring the multiple-mergers with companies who can impact many lives.
Why is the American FDA or any other healthcare agency passing many of the drugs and/or medical devices from foreign countries without their own monitoring extensive due diligence.? Ensuring the safety of the American citizens?
Why are foreign countries stating they are based in America, when their holding companies and members are based in their home international country?
Why aren’t American waterways safe from import/export? Does the government
know who and what is shipping in and out of America?
Lastly, Why is the government allowing “Eugenics in America” Harming Human Lives?
Why are members republican party members working with these Big Pharma companies?
Why are many of these International Corporations and members from Europe,
Germany and part of ALEC organization, and U.S. Interpol?
Why are their so many Powerful top international countries owning United States Corporations?
ALL OF THE ABOVE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED BY THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND ALL EUGENICS PARTICIPANTS! EXPERIMENTAL MEDICAL CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY HAS TO BE DEALTH WITH IN AMERICAN IMMEDIATELY!
CONCLUSION
THE FOLLOWING RESEARCH, SHOULD BE A WAKE UP CALL TO EVERY AMERICAN FAMILY IN THE UNITED STATES, WHO’VE BEEN BLIND SIDED FOR MANY DECADES, THINKING YOUR FAMILIES WERE SAFE?
NOW THE TRUTH HAS COME OUT IT IS TIME FOR THINGS TO CHANGE. HUMAN BEINGS ARE NOT ANIMALS TO CONTROL OR DESTROY! EVERY HUMAN BEING HAS A RIGHT TO LIFE. EUGENIC’S WOMEN STERILIZATION OR REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH TAINTING VIA PHARMACEUTICAL IS A CRIME AGAINST A WOMAN’S HUMANITY!
PLEASE PASS ON TO EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN THAT YOU KNOW! THIS CAN NOT HAPPEN IN THIS DAY AND AGE! EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN TRULY SHOULD BE VERY, CONCERNED FOR THEIR FAMILIES LIVES.
ALL AMERICAN FAMILIES HAVE BEEN WATCHED FOR DECADES, INCLUDING MANY UNKNOWN IMMIGRANTS. NOW THE MONSTROCITIES FROM ADOLF HITLER EUGENICS THEORY IS IN AMERICA!
ELITE – LIVE – -POOR – DIE – WOMEN – STERLIZED BY – REPRODUCTIVCE HEALTH
AMERICAN CITIZENS WILL FIGHT FOR THEIR FAMILIES SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELL BEING! AMERICANS WILL NOT STAND FOR THE TOP ELITE MEMBERS OF THE TOP 1% IN THE WORLD TO TAKE OTHER HUMAN BEINGS LIVES, THEY PERSONALLY FEEL AREN’T FIT TO LIVE ON EARTH!
AMERICAN CITIZENS WILL FIGHT AND UNITE AS ONE COUNTRY!
TO ENSURE THAT HUMAN LIVES ARE SPARED – AND THE CORRUPTION – MONEYPOWER & GREED STOPS IN OUR COUNTRY!
EVERY AMERICAN WILL STAND FIRM FOR THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT’S AND RIGHT TO LIFE! ALL WOMEN WILL STILL STAND FIRM TO PROTECT OUR BODIES AND OUR CHILDREN, WHETHER DISABLED OR HEALTHY!
CABIRI,
FREELANCE EDITOR
CONSUMER ADVOCACY BUSINESS INDUSTRY RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATIONS
Department of Health and Human Services
Consumer Advocacy Business Industry Research & Investigations (CABIRI) 
You must be logged in to post a comment.