Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Quote:

---

There are countless ways patients could assure quality service from doctors without resorting to anti-competitive regulation.

---

What are they? Without comparative studies done by neutral third parties, all you have is advertising and word of mouth.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

"Bioweapon factories are being constructed in every major city." To what are you referring?

---

Quote:

---

Bioweapon labs will bring threat of lethal viruses to urban America

London Independent
June 29, 2003

In the tiny town of Hamilton, Montana, campaigners worry that they will become a terrorist target if the proposed laboratory goes ahead. In New York State, congressmen have already blocked a proposal to house a laboratory on Plum Island, off Long Island. In Davis, California, home to a major branch of the state university system, activists have sued the university for failing to abide by state environmental regulations in making its application to house nasties ranging from Ebola to hanta virus and tick-borne encephalitis.

This is not just a matter of nimbyism. The protesters cannot understand why they should risk exposure to the tiny clutch of diseases requiring the construction of maximum-security "level 4" biosafety facilities - there are just five of them - when none has any known practical utility as a guerrilla weapon. The diseases the national security people are most worried about - anthrax, smallpox and plague - are either level 2 or level 3, and plenty of laboratories at those levels exist already.

"There is no benefit to our community. Not a single one," said Samantha McCarthy, who is leading efforts against the Davis biolab.

In Davis, in particular, there are serious security concerns. This is a university that managed to spread major contamination in a 1950s experiment to irradiate beavers. The clean-up is still going on. In February, a rhesus monkey used in disease experiments mysteriously disappeared from campus and has never been found. Now, the university is proposing to contract out security for the new biolab to Los Alamos, the nuclear laboratory in New Mexico embroiled in numerous security lapses - most recently when it lost what it called a "small" amount of low-grade plutonium.

According to Ms McCarthy, the biolab plan would entail the transport of highly dangerous materials in and out of town in ordinary lorries - a system that recently brought a Hazmat team out on to a road in Ohio after an explosion involving a lower-grade biological agent.

Most experts agree that the level 4 facilities would probably be pretty safe, since they are made of numerous isolation chambers that researchers would enter in moon-style protective gear. Whether they are suitable for urban areas such as Davis is a matter of debate, however. One biolab designer, Jim Orzechowski of the Canadian firm of Smith Carter Architects and Engineers, told the Los Angeles Times less than reassuringly last week: "We're getting as close to fail safe as possible. As fail safe as the space shuttle." The space shuttle has had two catastrophic failures in 17 years.

The broader question, however, is why these laboratories are being built at all. According to Richard Ebright, professor of chemistry at Rutgers University, it is a matter of crazy bureaucratic logic. Congress flooded the National Institutes of Health with so much money that the NIH simply could not work out how to spend it all on biodefence. Even if the NIH accepted every single research proposal without vetting - something it would never do - and built as many level 2 and level 3 labs as it possibly could, it still would not get through the $6bn. Only super-expensive level 4 labs can do the trick - even though they are of negligible scientific or medical value and do not cover bioweapon agents.

"Not only is this a monumental waste of money," Professor Ebright said, "but the new labs raise their own security issues. And it can't be a good idea to increase the number of people trained in handling these agents given the damage that a rogue scientist could do."

www.infowars.com/print/planned_terror/urban_labs.htm

---

Quote:

---

Emerging Technologies: Genetic Engineering and Biological Weapons

Briefing Paper - 9 October 2003
Sunshine Project Backgrounder #12

Recreating the Spanish flu: In 1918 and 1919, the so-called "Spanish flu" killed an estimated 20-40 million people worldwide. Just two weeks ago, $15 million was granted by the US National Institutes of Health to Stanford University to study how to guard against the flu virus "if it were to be unleashed as an agent of bioterrorism". Attempts to recover the Spanish flu virus date to the 1950s, when scientists unsuccessfully tried to revive the virus from victims buried in the permafrost of Alaska.[2] In the mid 1990s, Dr Jeffrey Taubenberger from the US Armed Forces Institute of Pathology started to screen preserved tissue samples from 1918 influenza victims. It appears that this work was not triggered by a search for flu treatments, or the search for a new biowarfare agent, but by a rather simple motivation: Taubenberger and his team were just able to do it. In previous experiments they had developed a new technique to analyse DNA in old, preserved tissues and for now looking for new applications: "The 1918 flu was by far and away the most interesting thing we could think of" explained Taubenberger the reason why he started to unravel the secrets of one of most deadliest viruses known to humankind." A sample of lung tissue from a 21-year-old soldier who died in 1918 at Fort Jackson in South Carolina, yielded what the Army researchers were looking for: intact pieces of viral RNA that could be analysed and sequenced. In a first publication in 1997, nine short fragments of Spanish flu viral RNA were revealed (Taubenberger et al. 1997). By 2002, four of the eight viral RNA segments had been completely sequenced, including the two segments that are considered to be of greatest importance for the virulence of the virus: the genes for hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA). In the forthcoming issue of the scientific journal Emerging Infectious Diseases, another article on the Spanish flu DNA sequence will be published (Reid et al. 2003). The project did not stop at sequencing the genome of the deadly 1918 strain. The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology teamed up with a microbiologist from the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. Together, they started to reconstruct the Spanish flu. In a first attempt, they combined gene fragments from a standard laboratory influenza strain with one 1918 gene. They infected mice with this chimera, and it turned out that the 1918 gene made the virus less dangerous for mice (Basler et al. 2001). In a second experiment, published in October 2002 (Tumpey et al. 2002), the scientists were successful in creating a virus with two 1918 genes. This virus was much more deadly to mice than other constructs containing genes from contemporary influenza virus. This experiment is only one step away from taking the 1918 demon entirely out of the bottle and bringing the Spanish flu back to life. The scientists were aware of the dangers of their creation. The experiments were conducted under high biosafety conditions at a laboratory of the US Department of Agriculture in Athens, Georgia. Possible hostile use of their work was an issue considered by the scientists:"the available molecular techniques could be used for the purpose of bioterrorism" (Tumpey et al. 2002:13849). There is no sound scientific reason to conduct these experiments. A resuscitation of the Spanish flu is neither necessary nor warranted from a public health point of view. If Jeffery Taubenberger worked in a Chinese, Russian or Iranian laboratory, his work might well be seen as the "smoking gun" of a biowarfare program.

http://news.phaseiii.org/article4004.html

---

Quote:

---

Living Terror: Lab secrets in dispute

By DEE ANN DIVIS AND NICHOLAS M. HORROCK
United Press International

WASHINGTON, Aug. 6 (UPI) -- A battle between a Texas university and an advocacy group could force a showdown on how much Americans are allowed to know about bioterrorism research in their communities.

The Sunshine Project of Austin, Texas, is seeking the minutes of a key local safety committee that sets and monitors precautions taken during potentially dangerous experiments with recombinant DNA -- artificially created DNA -- often made by splicing together DNA molecules from different organisms.

Such DNA research will play a significant role in roughly $10.5-billion worth of Bush administration programs to develop countermeasures against bioterror weapons. Minutes of the meetings of such committees, called Institutional Biosafety Committees, or IBCs, could provide insight into biodefense research, including the degree of risk involved. The risk information is increasingly important as nearly two dozen new biodefense labs are being built or proposed across the nation -- many of them in the middle of densely populated areas.

One of the organizations proposing a new lab, however -- the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston -- is refusing to release the minutes of its IBC. UTMB-Galveston is the focus of the Sunshine Project request.

Dr. Clarence Peters, director for biodefense at the Center for Biodefense and Emerging Infectious Diseases at UTMB, told United Press International releasing the minutes would violate new privacy and security laws.

"The reason for (refusing to release the minutes) is that we have some new things that have come along since the (National Institutes of Health) guidelines were promulgated. We have the Homeland Security Act, and the Texas Homeland Security Act -- not the same as the federal one -- the USA Patriot Act, the Texas Public Information Act and the Health Insurance Accountability and Portability Act. If you get crosswise of some of those you go to jail."

The minutes and other committee documents are supposed to be public under well-established guidelines issued by the NIH. Those federal guidelines, in place since 1994, apply to any NIH-funded research -- even research funded in part. Every organization doing such research is required to have an IBC. Failure to follow the guidelines potentially could result in the loss of NIH funding -- a very serious prospect because the NIH is a primary sources of research grants.

Peters asserted, however, that UTMB had been told specifically not to release the information by the Texas Attorney General.

Correspondence provided by both the Sunshine Project and UTMB indicates -- although the Attorney General supported UTMB's assertion that the material was exempt from release -- the ruling was not based on security or privacy grounds, but on UTMB claims of exemption under Texas law protecting commercially valuable information.

When asked about this, Peters said security and privacy were issues. "The letter was not a comprehensive letter," Peters told UPI, "if it doesn't mention those issues that's fine."

"When we submit grants to NIH that information is proprietary information," Peters explained. "That is our intellectual capital. We don't give it out regardless of whether it is biodefense or drug development for hepatitis or cardiovascular surgery or anything. That's the way it is done."

Peters insisted the minutes contained personal information, such as vaccination details, and security-related information, such as the locations of biodefense materials, that had to be withheld. He admitted, though, that no information at all had been released from the university's committee meetings.

NIH failed to respond to repeated requests for information on the guidelines and procedures regarding the withholding of funds.

The IBCs are independent from the institutions they monitor and include both technical experts and members of the local community. They review research procedures, staff expertise and follow the progress of projects, reporting any problems. IBCs devise emergency plans and set the level of containment that researchers must use for different research. Containment levels reflect the risk involved in working with viruses, bacteria or toxins. In the case of the most dangerous bioterrorism pathogens -- some of which can cause uncontrollable and untreatable bleeding -- the highest level or Biosafety Level 4 is required.

NIH encourages committees to hold open meetings and says in its guidelines that "upon request, the institution shall make available to the public all Institutional Biosafety Committee meeting minutes and any documents submitted to or received from funding agencies which the latter are required to make available to the public."

The Sunshine Project, a bioweapon watch-dog organization, requested the minutes as part of its efforts to monitor bids by the university for NIH money to build and support a seven-story, high-security laboratory to study vaccines and treatments against bioterror weapons. UTMB has applied to build one of the new National Biocontainment Laboratories and to do research as one of the new Regional Centers of (Biodefense) Excellence. The university recently completed a 2,000-square-foot, BSL 4 laboratory.

Ed Hammond, director of The Sunshine Project filed a request August 4 asking NIH to halt consideration of UTMB -- Galveston for the new contracts.

"We've ask NIAID to suspend consideration of UTMB proposals until OBA completes an investigation and the situation is remedied," Hammond told UPI.

Since the guidelines apply to any NIH-funded DNA work, and not just biodefense work, failure to release the information could place at risk any other NIH money related to recombinant DNA research and maybe even funds for non-DNA work as well.

Whether or not the federal guidelines trump the state law remains to be seen. It would depend on whether the guidelines were adopted as a fully substantive, regulations, said Mark Seidenfeld, an attorney and law professor at the Florida State University College of Law. It would be necessary to look at the history of the regulation and the legal authority behind the regulation to make that determination he said.

Hammond insisted that his organization is not trying to stop defense work but wants to ensure that the work stays defensive and does not slip over into closely related offensive weapons research.

"The Sunshine Project has never opposed UTMB receiving biodefense funds or conducting biodefense research, in principle," said Hammond. "It is only in the past week that we have taken the stance that they should not receive these grants. The reason why is not that we opposed the labs: it has everything to do with issues of transparency and accountability. ... In a broader sense we hope drawing attention to UTMB's failure to comply with the guidelines will send a signal to other institutions that are conducting biodefense research that they need to be transparent in their activities and that there are organizations like mine that are going to be monitoring them."

UTMB is working to clarify the issues said Peters.

"We are talking to our lawyers about this situation, and they will be in contact with NIH, because of the privacy issues ... homeland security issues and Texas law. We will be absolutely in compliance with requirements when this is all sorted out."

www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030806-061348-4757r

---

Quote:

---

America's war on the web

Sunday Herald
Scotland

IMAGINE a world where wars are fought over the internet; where TV broadcasts and newspaper reports are designed by the military to confuse the population; and where a foreign armed power can shut down your computer, phone, radio or TV at will.

In 2006, we are just about to enter such a world. The Pentagon has already signed off $383 million to force through the document’s recommendations by 2009.

Psychological military operations, known as psyops, will be at the heart of future military action. Psyops involve using any media – from newspapers, books and posters to the internet, music, Blackberrys and personal digital assistants (PDAs) – to put out black propaganda to assist government and military strategy. Psyops involve the dissemination of lies and fake stories and releasing information to wrong-foot the enemy.

The US wants to take control of the Earth’s electromagnetic spectrum, allowing US war planners to dominate mobile phones, PDAs, the web, radio, TV and other forms of modern communication. That could see entire countries denied access to telecommunications at the flick of a switch by America.

Freedom of speech advocates are horrified at this new doctrine, but military planners and members of the intelligence community embrace the idea as a necessary development in modern combat.

www.sundayherald.com/54975

---

Quote:

---

"Before the time of the genocide of millions known as the Holocaust, the German government established 'euthanasia' programs for handicapped German children and adults. Organized killings of an estimated 70,000 German citizens took place at killing centers and in psychiatric institutions. At the specialized centers, children who were designated by the Reich Committee for euthanasia were killed shortly after arrival by medication or were starved to death. The children's euthanasia program in Germany during the Nazi era is reported to have had its origin in the request by a father of a deformed and retarded child to Hitler to have this child killed. Hitler asked his personal physician to investigate the situation and the child was eventually killed. In 1936-1937, a secret 'Reich Committee for the scientific registering of serious hereditary and congenital illnesses' was established in Hitler's Chancellory. This committee of three drafted a prospective law calling for the 'destruction of life unworthy of life'. Phenobarbital was mixed into the children's food every morning and night until they became unconscious and developed pneumonia. Some were also given injections of morphine and scopolamine. Killing hospitals were set up. The staff selected for killing patients who were unable to work as well as 'patients who caused extra work for the nurses, those who were deaf-mute, ill, obstructive, or undisciplined, and' anyone else who was simply annoying.' From all parts of Germany patients were abducted to be killed. Fraudulent death certificates were prepared. In some clinics, the tensions of the job were soothed by a visit to the wine cellars to mark every fiftieth killing with copious amounts of wine and cider. The doctors sometimes received a 250RM [approximately $800 US] Christmas bonus. Dr. Mootz: 'If the patients were in their right minds and could see through everything, we told them that their health condition had improved in a manner that they only would have to take a cure in order to get discharged. The patients believed us in most cases. I remember that one patient was a strict Catholic and the last day she asked for a priest to get the last sacraments. I remember very clearly and can say with absolute certainty that the priest was informed before the killing and that the patient, who at least that day was completely in her right mind, got the last sacraments from the priest. Young nurses deliberately weren't appointed to participate in the killings because we feared they couldn't be able to keep their mouths shut. The killing of a person is a hard strain on the nerves of the person doing it. It's a fact of experience that medicine doesn't taste good and people generally are not readily prepared to take medicine. The same can be said with regard to injections. Almost all of our patients were scared of injections. I proceeded with a lot of compassion. I had told patients that they would have to take a cure. They were not to be tortured more than necessary.' At the Doctors' Trial in Nuremberg, physicians were convicted of crimes against humanity. The German nurse-historian, Hilde Steppe, has written: 'We have a moral obligation to the millions of victims of National Socialism.'"
—NURSES' PARTICIPATION IN THE "EUTHANASIA" PROGRAMS OF NAZI GERMANY, The Children's Euthanasia Program (under Civil Law)
www.interlog.com/~mighty/essays/nurses.htm

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Nuclear weapons* are powerful things. You wouldn't want just anybody to have access to them b/c the risk isn't just to that person.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:

Over 44 percent of all working-age adults with medical bills said their debts were 2,000 dollars or higher.

---