Posted on Leave a comment

The Largest Unethical Medical Experiment in Human History – Georgia Institute of Technology

Georgia Tech Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

Source: Georgia Institute of Technology
This monograph describes the largest unethical medical experiment in human history: the implementation and operation of non-ionizing non-visible EMF radiation (hereafter called wireless radiation) infrastructure for communications, surveillance, weaponry, and other applications. It is unethical because it violates the key ethical medical experiment requirement for “informed consent” by the overwhelming majority of the participants. The monograph provides background on unethical medical research/experimentation, and frames the implementation of wireless radiation within that context. The monograph then identifies a wide spectrum of adverse effects of wireless radiation as reported in the premier biomedical literature for over seven decades. Even though many of these reported adverse effects are extremely severe, the true extent of their severity has been grossly underestimated. Most of the reported laboratory experiments that produced these effects are not reflective of the real-life environment in which wireless radiation operates. Many experiments do not include pulsing and modulation of the carrier signal, and most do not account for synergistic effects of other toxic stimuli acting in concert with the wireless radiation. These two additions greatly exacerbate the severity of the adverse effects from wireless radiation, and their neglect in current (and past) experimentation results in substantial under-estimation of the breadth and severity of adverse effects to be expected in a real-life situation. This lack of credible safety testing, combined with depriving the public of the opportunity to provide informed consent, contextualizes the wireless radiation infrastructure operation as an unethical medical experiment.

Indeed, at the hart of many unethical medical experiments is the lack of informed consent and the loss of consent. Would you recognize an unauthorized and unethical medical experiment if you saw one? What would it look like? How would one report it? In fact in the past some governments have been apart of unethical experiments. The most widely known of these in recent history were the experiments conducted by the Nazis.

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

Ethical or exploitative—should prisoners participate in COVID-19 vaccine trials?

Source: Science Mag
By Eli CahanSep. 14, 2020 , 1:50 PM

Science’s COVID-19 reporting is supported by the Pulitzer Center and the Heising-Simons Foundation.

As 38 clinical trials seek tens of thousands of volunteers to receive doses of experimental vaccines, researchers are discussing how to find and recruit participants effectively and ethically. Some people who are especially vulnerable to COVID-19 have not been well represented in studies—or represented at all. Prisoners, for instance, have borne a heavy burden of COVID-19, with more than 125,000 U.S. prisoners infected, and more than 1000 dead. But prisoners have also been excluded from the trials out of concern that they might be coerced into participating or exploited if they do.

Now, some researchers argue that including prisoners in studies could offer outsize health benefits. Correctional facilities have experienced many COVID-19 outbreaks and are structurally unsuited to social distancing (among other precautions). And so, the researchers argue, like other people at high risk of catching the disease, prisoners should be allowed to participate in clinical trials. 

ScienceInsider spoke with George Annas, a lawyer and bioethicist at Boston University, whose research addresses ethics and human rights in clinical trials, and Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein, a sociologist and epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, who studies management of infectious disease and substance abuse in incarcerated people. Both have published about health and ethics in holding facilities during the pandemic: In July, Annas wrote in The New England Journal of Medicine about inhumane medical practices in immigrant detention centers and, and in August, Brinkley-Rubinstein and colleagues argued in JAMA that prisoners should be included in vaccine trials.

This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

Q: What clinical research has been done historically in correctional facilities? Has it been done well?

George Annas: The history is pretty dark. It’s a history of research done without consent, without oversight, and without consequences. It starts in some respects with the Nazis, since Holocaust research—or pretend research, really—was done in prisoners to get scientific information for the German state. Another famous experience was John Charles Cutler’s 1940s experiments in Guatemalan prisons. In those experiments, prisoners were deliberately infected with gonorrhea, syphilis, and chancroid.

Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein: There are lots of instances of prisoners being intentionally infected with diseases in order to develop new drugs, including malaria and hepatitis C. Horrible things happened at San Quentin [State Prison], including giving prisoners experimental testicular transplants. I think dark is the right word.

Q: Is any COVID-19 vaccine research taking place in correctional facilities? Has anyone put forward serious proposals to do such research?

L.B.R.: There was some conversation at the federal level at the initiation of large vaccine trials to include people involved in some way with the criminal justice system. My colleagues and I had a couple of phone calls with people involved in running those trials to see if it was something they’d entertain. There was some openness to it. But ultimately, including incarcerated populations felt too cumbersome. Between the ethical risks and the operational obstacles to actually get the sites up and running, it would have required a lot of extra effort.

G.A.: Up until recently, there’s really been no excuse to do research in these settings. But it’s a strange and perhaps intriguing group to study, because they’re almost definitely going to be exposed to the virus. So, it could give you answers you may not get if you trial the general population—who may not ever be exposed. That’s why we’re looking again. I’m not a big fan of prison research, but I am a big fan of science, so I think we should look at all these things again.

L.B.R.: Still, I think part of this conversation should be focused on people on probation or parole—the high-risk population that is criminal justice involved, but not presently incarcerated.

G.A.: Yeah. I’d be much more amenable to efforts to bring people on probation or parole into trials. They would be unshackled, literally, from some of the risks of exploitation we think about for prisoners who receive perks for “good” behavior and punishment for “bad” behavior.

Q: Could this kind of research actually benefit incarcerated people if they participate?

L.B.R.: It definitely could, assuming the vaccine works. Incarcerated people do have different risks, in terms of the barriers they face to getting certain elements of routine health care along with their potential to be exploited. But they also potentially would gain more from vaccination, given these settings are extreme amplifiers of infection.

G.A.: But the risk if an experimental vaccine doesn’t work is that these individuals won’t only be disappointed, but they’ll feel they were lied to or exploited.

L.B.R.: Another big part about why understanding these contexts is important is that we do eventually want vaccines to be made available to these populations. But there are lots of implementation issues that are very particular to jails and prisons. How do we store the vaccines under potentially very specific conditions? How do we monitor patients for side effects after injections? How we manage any needed follow-up, like a booster shot? We need to get expertise to optimize these programs when vaccines are eventually deployed. I don’t think that alone is justification to do a trial, but it is such a big part of vaccines being effective once they are approved. It’s something we’ll have to figure out.

Q: Could there be broader public health advantages for doing COVID-19 vaccine research in correctional facilities? Would experimental use of vaccines in correctional facilities benefit staff, neighboring communities, and more distant ones?

L.B.R.: If the experimental vaccines work, then the public health benefit of focusing vaccine resources—even during trials—on correctional facilities cannot be overemphasized. We’ve already seen that jail churn plays a tremendous role in community transmission.

G.A.: To me, it’s a different experiment. You can’t use community results to justify research on individuals. The risk-benefit analysis needs to come out right for the individual before they can consent to being in the trial.

Q: If such research is undertaken, how will we know whether ethical safeguards did enough to protect participants’ rights?

George Annas (left) and Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein (right) GEORGE ANNAS AND LAUREN BRINKLEY-RUBINSTEIN

G.A.: There probably is no replacement for asking the participants themselves. Did they feel exploited? Did they feel used? Did they feel fulfilled? Did they feel part of something bigger?

L.B.R.: This is really at the crux of the issue. We’d have to ask, but also to appoint oversight boards that have prisoner representation. And we’d have to adopt other safeguards to ensure we are doing things ethically.

Q: Would giving prisoners the option to participate in a vaccine trial set a precedent for future research? What about continuing to withhold access?

G.A.: I think the question of “if not now, when?” is a very good one. We have a worldwide pandemic with a giant prisoner population that’s very susceptible to the disease and is dying from it. If we’re not going to permit research in that circumstance, we’re never going to permit it.

L.B.R.: Also, if we can figure out how to do this right—given the stakes right now—that could give back some element of power or respect that is otherwise not present in these places.

G.A.: It’s a question of whether we treat prisoners as human beings with agency, who are allowed to participate in something for the public good.

L.B.R.: Our approach to experimentation in prisons has been very binary: a history of serious abuses of power when we have run trials, versus the decision to completely avoid including prisoners in trials. We have to ask ourselves whether there’s a middle path.

G.A.: And considering a middle path, but then deciding it’s too much work—that would be an extreme position, too.

Q: As the prospect of an approved vaccine nears, fierce debate surrounds who should receive it first. According to current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance, prisoners are not considered separate from the general population, putting them last in line. In contrast, a draft proposal released this month by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine said prisoners should get vaccinated after health care workers, but before the general population. Where do you think incarcerated people belong on the priority list?

L.B.R.: Based on the evidence have about outbreaks, incarcerated people should be at the top tier. There’s a clear connection between what happens in these institutions and what happens in the community. When we have infections that spread in jails or prisons like wildfire, and staff going in and out and in and out, we’re making COVID infection more likely everywhere. If the only thing you cared about was your own health, you would still make the decision to prioritize them.

G.A.: People at the highest risk should receive the treatment first. That includes prisoners. It’s that simple, really. 

doi:10.1126/science.abe7861

As we are in the midst of the only Pandemic in recent history desperately in search of a vaccine, one must question the ethics employed in medical trails and the medical industries murky and dark history with experimentation not to mention fraud and scams. Without a current doubt those who find an effective vaccine will reap financial benefit. Every country on the globe is interested. Are you willing to take a vaccine? A health professional once stated, there is no profit in health. The profit is in disease. As many are trying to decided who should have the vaccine first and reporting in those population most affected by the corona virus, one must ask if these populations should also bare the brunt of clinical trials as well. Are clinical trials on unknowing and those not asked ever ethical and permissible?

Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

Chronic Disease vs Terminal Illness

diabetes shidonna raven garden and cook

First what is the difference between chronic disease and terminal illness. Chronic disease is a disease like diabetes where as terminal illness is a disease that will kill the person who has it if not treated or cured. Even inflammation can be a chronic disease. It is a disease that is prolonged or long-term even lasting one’s whole life time. As we compare the two conditions, the question arises: why would someone who has a chronic disease accept it and live with it. A person with a terminal illness does not accept their disease they attempt to cure it least they perish. So, one could make the case that people accept chronic disease because although they are sick at least it will not necessarily kill them.

However, chronic disease is the body in a constant state of dis ease or disease. The body is constantly sick. Chronic disease, such as simple inflammation, can lead to other health complications. If there was a cure for chronic disease, would you seek the cure or manage the disease? We know from other health professionals that there is no money in health but rather in disease. What is even better is to keep the disease (chronic disease) around and simply manage the disease and this is more profitable than a disease that one cures. So, again why do we accept chronic disease? Share your thoughts with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. Keep sharing!

Luke 4:23 (King James Version): And he said unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this proverb, Physicianheal thyself: whatsoever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also here in thy country.

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

True to the Journey

covid 19 shidonna raven garden and cook

Moderna’s coronavirus vaccine deal with the U.S., announced last week with a $1.525 billion price tag, would be worth far more if all options are exercised—and if the mRNA biotech meets an aggressive timeline for the shot’s arrival.

The company stands to gain up to a whopping $8.125 billion, according to a Moderna securities filing that details the price for follow-up doses and the windfall for an early FDA approval.

The base agreement calls for 100 million doses of the company’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate, mRNA-1273, for $1.225 billion. But the drugmaker is eligible for a $300 million bonus if it’s able to score an FDA emergency use authorization or full approval by Jan. 31, the filing shows. 

Source: Fierce Pharma

As we get information regarding COVID 19 and on the many companies working on the vaccine, I am reminded of something my supervisor once said “the medical industry is a business like any other business”. A family friend recently shared that she tested positive for COVID 19. We prayed for her and offered her all the information we had about COVID 19. She was grateful, yet she stated that she would be seeking natural means for recovering from COVID 19. In the midst of a global pandemic it is easy to seek out the quickest solutions. She reminds us that through it all it is important to stay true to the ‘Organic Journey’. It is true in gardening and true with health. It may seem easier and quicker to grab the nearest chemical or drug for a solution. But, in our Organic Journey we have learned to first ask “what is the Organic Remedy to this problem. Who do you know that has been impacted by COVID 19? How has your family been impacted? How has your ability to work been impacted? Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

COVID 19, The Cure

covid 19 shidonna raven garden and cook
  • The US government’s Operation Warp Speed anticipates it will take until March to deliver 300 million doses of a coronavirus vaccine.
  • The ambitious vaccine initiative has often suggested the goal is to deliver the vaccine doses by January.
  • Business Insider confirmed that OWS expects to have initial doses available by January, but it will take several more months to produce and deliver 300 million doses.

The Trump administration has laid out an extraordinarily ambitious timeline for a coronavirus vaccine.

Operation Warp Speed, the government’s initiative to speed up vaccine work, says it’s aiming to deliver 300 million doses of a safe and effective shot by January 1. Creating a vaccine in less than a year would be an unprecedented feat — under normal circumstances, it can take a decade to develop a new vaccine and bring it to market.

But even if Warp Speed accomplishes this goal, most of us won’t be getting coronavirus vaccines in January. When administration officials talk about Warp Speed, they usually don’t mention that it will take months to distribute the shots across the nation.

The US Department of Health and Human Services, for example, says Warp Speed “aims to deliver 300 million doses of a safe, effective vaccine for COVID-19 by January 2021.”

But Operation Warp Speed won’t really deliver those 300 million doses to people until roughly March, administration officials acknowledged.

An unclear timeline for Operation Warp Speed

The confusion is evident in a timeline published on Thursday on the Defense Department’s Operation Warp Speed website. (OWS is a collaboration between the Department of Defense and the Department of Health and Human Services.)

The document, which Business Insider annotated below, says Warp Speed’s mission is to “deliver 300 million doses of safe and effective vaccine by 1 January 2021.” But it also shows how it will take 14 months to test, manufacture, and distribute a vaccine — a timeline that would stretch into March.

Operation Warp Speed coronavirus vaccine timeline
A one-page graphic outlines Operation Warp Speed’s plan to quickly develop, manufacture, and distribute a coronavirus vaccine. 

To be clear, distributing hundreds of millions of doses of a coronavirus vaccine by next March would be an unprecedented feat. Achieving that goal depends on a lot going right, including seeing success in clinical studies, ramping up manufacturing, and logistically executing the distribution of the shots across the nation.

It’s important to be realistic about when we’ll have a vaccine

As it stands, none of the coronavirus vaccine candidates that drugmakers are working on has shown that it can actually prevent infection or disease. Large-scale trials of vaccines from Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, and AstraZeneca have begun in recent weeks, with results likely to come later this fall or winter.

Stephane Bancel, the CEO of Moderna, recently estimated that in a best-case scenario — in which several of these leading vaccine candidates work — young and healthy people would likely receive their shots in spring 2021. If any of the leading shots fail in clinical trials, the timeline could be pushed into the second half of next year, Bancel said.

It’s important to be realistic about the timeline for a coronavirus vaccine, particularly as the US’s public-health response has become increasingly dependent on a vaccine to curb the pandemic. Shortcomings in testing, mask-wearing, and social distancing have laid bare the need for a vaccine, as more than 1,000 people in the US have died each day from the coronavirus in recent weeks.

Drug-industry CEOs have said we need to be cautious about the vaccine timeline

Some top drug-industry CEOs have also emphasized the need for caution on the most aggressive timelines.

Roche CEO Severin Schwan said in April that a vaccine would “most likely” not be ready before the end of 2021. Novartis CEO Vas Narasimhan said on Thursday at a Bloomberg News event that he had “reasonable confidence” that a vaccine could be broadly used by the end of next year.

Roche isn’t working on a coronavirus vaccine, while Novartis is involved in an early-stage vaccine project. Kenneth Frazier, the CEO of Merck, a drugmaker with a long track record of creating vaccines, has also urged people to be realistic about the timeline.

“I think when people tell the public that there’s going to be a vaccine by the end of 2020, for example, I think they do a grave disservice,” Frazier said in a recent interview with the Harvard professor Tsedal Neeley. “We don’t have a great history of introducing vaccines quickly in the middle of a pandemic. We want to keep that in mind.”

Merck is working on a coronavirus vaccine of its own but hasn’t provided a detailed timeline.

We asked the Trump administration to clarify Warp Speed’s goals

Business Insider asked Trump administration officials in recent days to clarify Warp Speed’s goals, because the recent timeline isn’t the only instance in which the administration has been unclear. For example:

  • Paul Mango, a senior administration official working on Operation Warp Speed and a deputy chief of staff at HHS, said on a press call on Wednesday, “I can tell you and reiterate we are on track to deliver hundreds of millions of doses by January 2021.”
  • President Donald Trump said earlier this month that a vaccine could be ready “right around” the November 3 election. “I’m rushing it. I am. I’m pushing everybody,” Trump told the radio host Geraldo Rivera, adding, “And we’re mass-producing the most promising candidates in advance so that we’re ready upon approval.”
  • HHS Secretary Alex Azar said in an interview with a local television station in August: “We now stand at a position where it is very credible that by the end of the year we will have in the high tens of millions of doses of FDA, gold-standard vaccine and, by the beginning of next year, hundreds of millions of doses of vaccines.”

Administration officials confirmed to Business Insider that it would take months after January to accomplish Warp Speed’s goals of injecting 300 million vaccine doses.

Here’s how Dr. Francis Collins, the head of the National Institutes of Health, put it in response to a question about the timeline:

“That last three months is distribution of 300 million doses,” Collins said. “That is the process of getting a dose to every American, which we didn’t expect we could do by the first of January. That’s going to take the additional three months to do so.”

Source: Business Insider

As noted above many have stated that it will be at least March 2021 before a vaccine is available and January 2021 simply is not realistic. What do you think of the current administrations handling of the pandemic? Do you think they can deliver a vaccine by January 2021? What do you think of this administration current handling of the economic crisis caused by the pandemic? Share your comments with the community by posting them below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

Wireless Medical Devices

Wireless Medical Devices
Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

One thing we know about the FDA is that its board of medical professionals (often with unreported conflicting relations) are often too quick to push drugs and medical devices onto the market. Often they have financial incentives that encourage them to get these drugs and devices on the market fast, which is why we often see recalls. When a drug and device is not properly tested, it brings clinical trails to the unknowing public who become tests subjects. The FDA is this not proactive but reactive in dealing with things that people often spend years complaining about. Indeed these complaints are often made by thousands upon thousands of people.

The question is, should we just because we can? Are we ready for this level of technology? Do we know all the risks or are we the test subjects? Many people eat GMOs (genetically modified organisms) without knowing it. The results are still out on the impact of GMOs on the public and environment. In fact many people do not even know what GMOs are. Share your comments with the community by positing them below. Share the wealth of healthy with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

Medical Devices

Defective Medical Devices
Source: International Consortium of Investigative Journalists
Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook

People go to hospitals and medical professionals for viable solutions. They go because they want things to improve. They want things to get better. What happens when the very thing that was suppose to help, makes things worse? What are the actual clinical trails for these devices? Do they have any oversight whatsoever or are they simply allowed to be in the market with no serious oversight by the FDA? The medical device industry makes the pharmaceutical industry look like a dinosaur. What are the benefits of pushing these devices on the market without considering the risks? Most pharmaceutical professionals will tell you that if a drug has not been on the market for 7 to 10 years you are the experiment. Why are these defective devices being recalled if they went through clinical trail? Share your comments with the community by posting below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

Medications & Substance Abuse

burdock seeds shidonna raven garden and cook

There is nothing more sensational than a star and their story of substance abuse. The questions is how do they get there. Indeed COVID 19 has highlighted the pharmaceutical industry as the world waits on the edge of its seat for a cure. In the mist of the pandemic many companies have gone under; others have faced tough times and decisions and yet others have re-invited themselves: namely Kodak. Kodak, famous for photo production, has now decided to get into the pharmaceutical business. Indeed there are many medicines, typically derived from nature, that have made a world of difference. There is no denying that the pharmaceutical industry makes several millions annually and often repackage a drug already on the market so they can circumvent clinical trails. The purpose of clinical trails is to confirm the medicine works and does what it claims to do.

Several times we have been offered medicines or a procedure that could be avoided by making changes in our diet, i.e. dialysis in place of increasing iron intake and taking a dietary supplement. In fact the medicines can add up quickly during one hospital visit. In some cases the symptoms produced by one medicine lead to the prescription of another medicine to address conditions one would not have if they did not take the medicine. In fact many doctors report that their patience soon suffer substance abuse. But many medicines are some type of drug. Its easy to see how multiple drug prescriptions can lead to substance abuse if one is not careful.

How many medicines do you take? What are they for? What are their sources in nature? Share your posts below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Keep sharing!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.

Posted on Leave a comment

Healthy: the New Normal after COVID 19

covid 19 shidonna raven garden and cook

When we begin this journey and started our garden, it was February. Several weeks later COVID 19 grew into a global pandemic. Before the pandemic our health and finding a true healing, not medication management, was very important to several of us. In fact for many along this journey health is very important to them on a professional and personal level. When COVID 19 hit the world and the communities with preexisting conditions the hardest, health took on a whole new meaning. Healthy became the New Normal. No longer is it acceptable to wait around for the next illness to add to or make other illnesses and one’s over all health worse. Seeking and identifying real cures and healing is more important than ever now that COVID 19 has highlighted how preexisting conditions can have a profound effect on your current and future health. In fact we discovered with our own health challenges that chronic illness can lead to other illness.

Like many people with preexisting conditions we took extra precautions. We also doubled down on our efforts to achieve good health. The good news is that we are on a path that we hope is the path to healing. Our journey has highlighted many concerns about the Western approach to ‘health’. As one medical professional said. “There is no money in health. The money is in disease”. These chilling words remain with us as we struggled with several medical professionals who could treat symptoms, manage medicine (the pharmaceutical industry) and prescribe one medicine after another. Indeed they could prescribe medicines for one’s medicines. However, they were not good at finding a sustainable cure. They could offer procedures that gave temporary relief but no actual cure.

Should you have an illnesses or just want to improve your health, we hope your journey leads you to good health and a healing. COVID 19 has taught us many lessons and will teach us many lessons yet. One lesson that we have learned is not to simply accept the first answer(s) or solutions. But, to look for a sustainable healing that does not lead to dependency on medications. It caused us to ask: what do you do when you are not healthy and a pandemic or illness hits? You make healthy your New Normal. How has your health been impacted by COVID 19? How has COVID 19 adjusted how you socialize? Do you do more virtually? Share your comments below. Share the wealth of health with your friends and family by sharing this article with 3 people today. As always you are the best part of what we do. Stay healthy!

If these articles have been helpful to you and yours, give a donation to Shidonna Raven Garden and Cook Ezine today.