Archive for 2008

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Charlie Frohman’s Summary Letter, Febuary, 2008 Congressional Visits

Monday, February 18th, 2008

Dear XXX (Name inserted for each recipient)

Thanks for meeting with the Natural Solutions Foundation this past Thursday.

As explained in our meeting by “vitamin lawyer” Ralph Fucetola (who would serve as a wonderful witness in potential hearings), the vast majority of Americans want access to natural food, nutrients and therapies, and NSF hopes your Congressperson can ask HELP Chairman Kennedy to hold hearings on the smothering Guidelines from FDA, such as:

* requiring impossible scientific agreement on claims,
* threatening illegality to modalities by calling them untested CAM products,
* guaranteeing bankruptcy with untenable manufacturing practices,
* banning safe nutrients (such as ephedra and bioidentical hormones) by using unfair risk analyzes previously reserved for dangerous pharmaceuticals, and
* ignoring the role of pharmaceutical mixing when reviewing Adverse Event Reports for nutrients

These hearings need also to examine FDA’s 1995 “harmonization” requirements with the United Nation’s Codex Committee, which:

* uses WTO sanctions to impose its anti-natural therapies threats onto every nation on Earth, including the U.S.,
* follows the anti-natural therapies bias of FDA’s own representatives,
* has a Vitamin Committee that follows the European standard of treating natural nutrients as toxins, and limits dosage to 15% above the naturally occurring equivalent (a pathetically low standard, since the orange, in the case of Vitamin C, is grown in soil that is depleted by poisonous Big Agri chemicals, many of which were banned until reintroduced by Codex)
* requires irradiation of imported food,
* requires Monsanto’s growth hormone in imported milk
* prohibits Genetically Modified labeling, in case people think GMOs are risky

As you can see, the natural therapies preferred by a vast majority of Americans are threatened, and despite the congressional education by NSF of HELP and Energy and Commerce members going back to last Spring, no one in Congress yet has agreed to shine a light on FDA and Codex. May we count on your office to help move this process forward? If you do, please let us know and we’ll be glad to let our several hundred thousand member grassroots list know of your Leadership.

Meanwhile, below is our most recent eNewsletter. Please feel free to sign up, so you can become more familiar with our heavy involvement with countries around the world in opposing Codex and, here in the U.S., opposing FDA’s aggressive policies.

Posted in About Codex Alimentarius, Miscellaneous, The Law & CODEX | No Comments »

Spraying the LBAM: No Threat, No Loss, No Tests, No Sense

Sunday, February 17th, 2008

The California Department of Agriculture appears to have lost its sanity. Spraying an untested pesticide (a “plasticized pheromone”) which has never been tested for safety on people every 30 days over the San Francisco Bay area against a pest which has never infested the crops of the area or caused any crop damage while acknowledging that the substance could cause serious [fatal?] harm to people seems to make sense to them.

It does not make sense to me, but then, I am not on anyone’s payroll who makes these substances and will reap $74.5 million dollars for spraying the untested pesticide “CheckMate” over cities (and wild habitats neighboring) Monterey, Santa Cruz, Alameda, San Jose and San Francisco at least once every month until 2010. Does the same financial independence exist among the people who applied for an “emergency exemption from registration” from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency? This exemption, for an emergency that does not exist, allows the agency to use the pesticide in aerial sprays over California cities. Because of that exemption, the spraying program is not subject to state approval, according to representatives of the state Department of Pesticide Regulation.

Toxicity tests on CheckMate itself were apparently never conducted, nor were such tests conducted on the combined ingredients in the product. Toxicity test were carried out with “other leptidopteron pheromones” [i.e., compounds similar to the active ingredient in Checkmate] which apparently allowed the CFDA to conclude that all pheromones of that nature are similar [a highly questionable conclusion] yet the 75% or so other ingredients in CheckMate were not tested. “Inert ingredients” like the ones in Checkmate can be highly biologically active and pose significant threats to people, animals and ecosystems.

In fact, on Jan 5, 2008 the CDFA admitted that they had “neither the jurisdiction nor expertise to conduct an epidemiological study of the complaints, and no public health agency at this point has said they will review the illness claims.” That means that the symptoms reported during spraying of CheckMate over Monterey (which included asthma, coughing, muscle aches and headaches, as well as any long term impacts to either single exposures of monthly exposures over a 5 year period as currently planned for the Bay Area may well be the harbingers of major health problems for the millions of people exposed to this untested substance.

When local activists challenged the spraying in Santa Cruz on October 10, 2007, Judge Robert O’Farrell issued a temporary restraining order that which stopped the area’s second round of spraying until Oct. 18, when a hearing was scheduled to consider additional evidence in a lawsuit filed by Peninsula activists.

O’Farrell named the active ingredient in CheckMate— polymethylene polyphenyl isocyanate, or PPI, which is listed as a “hazardous agent” by the National Institutes of Health on the agencies’ Web site as the offending agent. The site noted reports of occupational asthma among spray painters exposed to it. Checkmate is made by Suterra.

The tests which were conducted mentioned ingestion and skin/eye application as problems, but not complications arising from inhalation. Claiming the plasticized capsules containing the pheromone are too large to directly enter the lung it is curious that the potential for irritation to the larynx, pharynx, and tracheo-bronchial passages are mentioned although apparently the safety profile in the respiratory tract was never tested.

Toxicity tests are done to determine whether the dosage is lethal but not what long term complications could arise after inhaling the substance.

Another concern about the CheckMate program is the ecological impact. There is little available information to suggest that the fragile and productive ecosystems of the Bay Area, both land and water based, will be left unharmed by the polymethylene polyphenyl isocyanate in Checkmate because no environmental impact statement has been filed.

Following you will find an article from the San Francisco Chronicle and a summary of the problems inherent in this mad scheme.

Pushback – our response to these assaults – is essential if we are to control and to safeguard our environments and our health. Help us push back! Disseminate this information, tell people about the Natural Solutions Foundation and urge them to go to the website, www.HealthFreedomUSA.org and sign up for the free, secure and informative Health Freedom eAlerts (http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?page_id=187). Natural Solutions Foundation – We are more than just talk!
Donate (http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?page_id=189)generously with a recurring tax deductible donation to the Natural Solutions Foundation, www.HealthFreedomUSA.org.

Thanks!

Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima

Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation

www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org

Now, an article from the San Francisco Chronicle:

The Light Brown Apple Moth which means that no State approval is required?
State plans Bay Area pesticide spraying

Jane Kay, Chronicle Environment Writer

The [California] state agriculture department plans to use airplanes at night this summer to spray a farm pesticide over urban San Francisco, Marin County and the East Bay, intending to eradicate a potentially destructive moth.

The little-known proposal to wipe out the light brown apple moth, which if it became established could destroy the region’s agricultural industry, has developed increasing opposition among some residents who fear for their health.

Hundreds of people whose homes and yards were sprayed in Santa Cruz and Monterey counties from September to December have filed reports that said the pesticide seems to have caused coughing, wheezing, muscle aches and headaches, among other symptoms. One Monterey family reported that a child had a first-time asthma attack.

State officials say the amount of pesticide applied shouldn’t pose severe health risks, but they’ve also refused to rule out that the spray can affect humans, particularly sensitive people such as children and the elderly.

Spraying of the pesticide, called Checkmate, is expected to begin in the Bay Area in August and could continue for five years over San Francisco, Daly City, Colma, Oakland, Piedmont, Emeryville, El Cerrito, El Sobrante, Tiburon and Belvedere. Other chemicals could also be used.

Before its use in Santa Cruz and Monterey last year, the pesticide, a hormone that throws off the scents of mating moths, had been used aerially only over farms and never over populated areas.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture obtained an “emergency exemption from registration” from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that allows the agency to use the pesticide in aerial sprays over California cities. Because of that exemption, the spraying program isn’t subject to state approval, according to representatives of the state Department of Pesticide Regulation.

There is no widespread infestation of the light brown apple moth, but U.S. Department of Agriculture officials say they are trying to head off a potential disaster. The federal agency has given the California Department of Food and Agriculture $74.5 million to conduct the spraying program, which officials say is warranted because an international survey of pests ranks the moth high as a threat, and moths have been found in the state, primarily in the Bay Area. The little moth was first trapped in Alameda County in March. The state agricultural agency followed up and found moths in 11 counties, said Larry Hawkins, a USDA spokesman.

The moth’s larvae stunts seedlings, pits leaves and can damage fruit trees, citrus and grapes.

Its potential spread to almost every plant around, including native trees, threatens crops worth up to $640 million a year, he said. The pesticide over time reduces the moth population by interfering with its ability to reproduce and doesn’t require the use of a more toxic insecticide, Hawkins said.

Steve Lyle, a spokesman for the state agricultural department, said new trapping data for 2008 could change the aerial spray program set for Marin, San Francisco and the East Bay.

“But right now, based on what we know, it will go ahead,” he said.

In response to complaints from residents from Santa Cruz and Monterey counties, several state agencies – the Department of Pesticide Regulation, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the Public Health Department – issued a statement that acknowledged that eye, skin or respiratory irritations reported by residents could have been caused by high applications but not by low ones.

“The toxicological information on the Checkmate product indicates that exposure to high levels of the applied material would be consistent with many of the reported symptoms,” the statement read.

The pesticide levels used in Santa Cruz and Monterey counties were extremely low, the agencies said, making it unlikely that anyone was exposed to a high dose.

However, the statement cautioned that “not all health effects can be predicted and because the general population includes susceptible (people), such as children, the elderly and those with chronic diseases, we cannot provide a definitive cause for their symptoms.”

The USDA’s Hawkins said the EPA has generally not been concerned over the toxicity of Checkmate. For example, he said, the agency never set a maximum limit for the pesticide in food or required farm workers to stay out of fields that had just been sprayed.

“It’s not a material the EPA would have any concern about,” Hawkins said.

Many residents in Santa Cruz and Monterey counties are joining an umbrella group, California Alliance to Stop the Spray, or CASS, to fight the continuing spraying program, which is expected to resume June 1.

More than 600 people from the two counties have reported symptoms, including asthma attacks, bronchial irritation, lung congestion and soreness, difficulty breathing, coughing and eye and throat irritation.

Dr. Randy Baker, a family practitioner in Soquel, said he treated about a dozen patients with a range of symptoms when the area was being sprayed. Although he said there was no way to ascertain a cause-and-effect relationship, he had a number of concerns about the pesticide, including the fact that it was not tested for use over urban areas.

“There is tremendous individual variation in the ability of people to process and detoxify environmental chemicals. For example, there could be a prescription medicine that 100 people take with minimal adverse effect but another person could take it and suffer extreme side effects and even death,” Baker said.

Baker was also shocked that the agricultural department started spraying the chemical on an evening when people were out walking in Santa Cruz.

“At 8 p.m., they started spraying in the most populated areas of Santa Cruz County. I have patients who didn’t know the spray was happening who were out walking on Mission Avenue. Clearly, the greatest danger is a person being out of doors when the planes are going over. They’re going to be inhaling the chemicals,” Baker said.

Further complicating the issue is that some residents say they simply don’t trust the government information. The pheromone is not the only chemical in the spray. Checkmate also contains at least 10 other ingredients.

The product contains a surfactant, which could have coated the more than 600 birds that turned up injured after the spraying last year as far north as Año Nuevo and south to Del Monte Beach in Monterey, they say. Government agencies attributed the substance that coated the birds to algal changes.

Elizabeth Quinn, a resident of Santa Cruz, is among those opposed.

On Nov. 9, starting at midnight, the planes flew 500-feet above Quinn’s house in Santa Cruz until 5:30 in the morning.

“They came over every 20 to 30 minutes, back and forth, back and forth,” she said. Quinn didn’t suffer any health problems after the sprays, but she is worried about the people who did.

“I have 6-year-old and 3-year-old grandsons,” she said, “and I’m very concerned about their health.”

Also Thursday, about 80 people turned up at a hearing held by Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, who heads the Assembly’s Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee. State health and agricultural officials and members of nonprofit groups presented details of the pending program, and most of the public that spoke were concerned about aerial spraying.

Last month, the Albany City Council voted unanimously to oppose the spraying, and the nonprofit Center for Environmental Health started holding meetings, the first in Oakland, to address questions from worried residents.

A series of meetings is scheduled this month to discuss the environmental reports of the moth-eradication program in the Bay Area.
Light brown apple moth

Problem: Larvae of the tiny moth, a native of Australia and much smaller than a penny, feeds on more than 2,000 plants and trees.

Eradication: Officials plan to spray pesticide to disturb its mating. More information: links.sfgate.com/ZCLW.

Source: California Department of Food and Agriculture

And an article listing the problems with LBAM spraying:

STOP AERIAL PESTICIDE SPRAYING IN CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN MARIN

What’s wrong with the LBAM spraying?
1.Hundreds of people in Santa Cruz and Monterey County have reported adverse health reactions. The spray has not been tested for long-term human toxicity and is being applied in microscopic plastic capsules that could pose inhalation risks.
2.The spray contains ingredients that are highly toxic to aquatic species, as well as surfactants, that might have contributed to algae bloom (red tide) and the death of hundreds of waterfowl.
3.Biologists agree that the spraying – an outdated, unsustainable, expensive pest control method – will not eradicate the moth. The CDFA should switch to a control vs. an eradication program using least-toxic methods that farmers already apply, e.g. sticky traps.
4.CDFA itself says the moth has done no crop damage in California to date. Priority must be given to public and environmental health and safety over speculative economic loss.
5.The aerial spray program disproportionately impacts vulnerable segments of the population, including those with the recognized disability of multiple chemical sensitivity, who are in many cases forced to relocate, and the homeless, who have no option to protect themselves from spraying.

Posted in The Law & CODEX | No Comments »

Now For A Little Pharma Phun: How About Some Mother/Baby Abuse

Sunday, February 17th, 2008

“Thirty years ago…Merck’s aggressive chief executive Henry Gadsden told Fortune magazine of his distress that the company’s potential markets had been limited to sick people. Suggesting he’d rather Merck to be more like chewing gum maker Wrigleys, Gadsden said it had long been his dream to make drugs for healthy people. Because then, Merck would be able to “sell to everyone.” Three decades on, the late Henry Gadsden’s dream has come true.”
Alliance for Human Research Protection

Mothers, unborn babies and infants are the next group to “sell to”. If Congress has its way, every pregnant mother and her unborn baby, every new mother and her (perhaps) nursing infant in the US would be someone to “sell to”, not just by Merck, but by the entire pharmaceutical industry. Click http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=23065(http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/t/1128/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=23065) to tell your Senators and Representatives that pregnant and new moms do not need drugging with meds that increase suicide and homicide and harm babies. Let them know that mental health decisions – like all health decisions – are a private matter, not a government one.

A new and shameless market ploy called “The Mother’s Act”, S 1375 IS (http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?p=527), would make them the next market success by compelling screening and “offering” “appropriate” treatment which includes, as the bottom line, drugs. The bill was originally proposed in response to the death by suicide of Melanie Stokes, a pharmaceutical rep.who took her own life by leaping from a balcony several stories off of the ground. Contrary to popular understanding it was not post-partum depression that killed Melanie, but the numerous antidepressant drugs she was taking, which the FDA confirmed double the suicide risk.

In my professional opinion as a Child, Adult and Adolescent Psychiatrist and in my opinion as a health freedom advocate, the so-called “Mother’s Act” represents an act of aggression against mothers, babies and liberties, all at the same time. Pregnant woman and infants, along with new mothers and their babies, are an untapped market for psychoactive drugs like anti-depressants and anti-psychotics. There is an excellent reason that they are an untapped market for these drugs. Because they are so dangerous for these groups of people, these drugs, like most others, have been strictly off limits for pregnant and nursing moms and their babies.

But no longer. If Senators MENENDEZ (D-NJ), DURBIN (D-IL), SNOWE (R-ME), BROWN (D-OH), DODD (D-CT), and LAUTENBERG (D-NJ) have their way, pregnant mothers will be “screened” for tendencies toward “postpartum blues”, “depression” and “psychosis” and offered medications if they show any such tendencies. Another new market opened for the Pharma Pholks!

To my knowledge, this would bring to eight the number of pieces of Federal Legislation which make it possible to compel people living in the United States of America to take medication or set the stage for state compulsion to take those meds. The mis-named Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, BioShield, BioShield II, BioShield III, New Freedoms Initiative, No Child Left Behind and now the “Mother’s Act”.

Picture this scenario: a mother to be confesses to being nervous, worried, anxious or concerned about the impact of the coming baby (Signs of mental health in my book, by the way). A nurse, social worker, “counselor” or doctor turns her concern into pathology on a “screening tool” called a piece of paper (or computer screen). Mom’s public medical record (there are no confidential medical records in the US any longer unless you go to a physician who has exempted him/herself from HIPAA, [Health Insurance Privacy and Accountability Act] and pay for the services yourself) now states that she has a mental illness. Next, she will be “offered” drugs to “help her” with her normal feelings. These are the proverbial drugs for the worried well. What happens if they decide not to take them? Could mothers be forcibly imprisoned or held in a psychiatric facility? Of course they could. How about moms who have already given birth: could the same happen to them or could they loose custody of their children if they decided not to take the advice of the screener and take meds? You bet. Consider the invasive and unconstitutional losses of parental rights when parents do not medicate their kids. Consider the cases where chemotherapy or Ritalin (c) or Zoloft (c) or whatever have been forced upon kids and grown ups. Consider the forcible vaccination – and re-vaccination – of 2,700 Prince George’s County (MD) poor, mostly black children (1100 of whom had already been vaccinated fully but whose records had been lost by the school (according to its own admission).

Consider this fact: the March of Dimes advises against the use of these drugs in pregnant women since they can cause birth defects. Consider, too, the fact that the numerous psychiatric drugs which the woman who killed herself in the post partum period, Melanie Stokes, a pharmaceutical rep. (who took her own life by leaping from a balcony several stories off of the ground) doubled her risk of suicide according to the FDA while being a post partum mom did no such thing.

According to the officers of “Unite”, an organization opposing this legislation and the use of all other psychiatric medications,

“To simply screen women for post-partum mood disorders and ensure that they get “treatment,” we would be setting families up for the expectation of tragedy and increasing the chances of that actually happening when we refer them to medical “professionals” who are oblivious to the negative mind-altering effects of psychiatric drugs. A popular opinion among medical caregivers these days is that “post-partum mood disorders” must be a sign of an underlying biochemical imbalance and would be corrected with drugs.

Current drugs used on post-partum women include SSRIs, atypical antidepressants, and even antipsychotic drugs. These pose a significant risk to the immediate safety and health of women as well as their children and families. SSRIs carry a black box warning for suicide and the most popular one, Effexor (the same med. Andrea Yates was taking when she drowned her 5 children), has the words “homicidal ideation” listed as a side effect. “Nearly every recent case of infanticide which has made news can be clearly linked back to a psychiatric drug. These drugs endanger babies and mothers.”

Additionally, the drugs can be extremely addictive and also pose a risk to nurslings or babies exposed in subsequent pregnancies. Some babies have died from SIDS linked to drug exposure from pregnancy or nursing; others have experienced coma, seizures, GI bleeding, heart defects, lung problems, and many babies died before reaching full term or soon after birth” when their moms have been exposed to these drugs.

The bill does not address the fact that studies show that biological agents (antidepressants for example) cited in the bill and already prescribed to pregnant women can cause congenital heart birth defects where children have had to undergo open-heart surgeries to correct this. Also, some babies are being born with organs outside their bodies, requiring immediate surgery.”

Never mind that these drugs are untested in large scale use during pregnancy and are listed as drugs to avoid while pregnant and nursing. Never mind that the March of Dimes and the Physician’s Desk Reference (PDR) advise avoiding these drugs during those time. Never mind that the American Academy of Pediatrics cites an article which says, “Our knowledge [of the impact of psychiatric drugs on the fetus] will remain limited because prospective, randomized, and well-controlled investigational studies on the risks of exposure to psychoactive drugs during pregnancy are neither feasible nor ethical” in its Policy Statement on the Use of Psychoactive Medication During Pregnancy and Possible Effects on the Fetus and Newborn.

They also state, “Potential adverse effects for the fetus and the neonate include: 1) structural malformations, 2) acute neonatal effects including intoxication and neonatal abstinence syndromes, 3) intrauterine fetal death, 4) altered fetal growth, and 5) neurobehavioral teratogenicity. Neurobehavioral teratogenicity encompasses long-term central nervous system defects that result in delayed behavioral maturation, impaired problem solving, and impaired learning. Physical malformations do not necessarily accompany the functional deficits. Chronic in utero exposure to drugs may result in intoxication or tolerance postnatally. Neonatal drug withdrawal symptoms may occur when drug exposure ceases at birth. Specific and supportive therapy may be required if the newborn displays signs of continued drug effects or withdrawal. Long-term developmental and neurologic follow-up is appropriate, including consideration for referral to centers for national databases (eg, Teratology Information Services and Motherisk Program).” But never mind. A market is a market and this one is nearly virgin since the drugs in question have had posted warning advising their avoidance in pregnancy and nursing.

And what a market it is! The text of the bill states that although “The causes of postpartum depression are complex and unknown at this time” (which means that treatment designed to suppress the symptoms without dealing with the cause is a poor way to go), the market is vast since, ” Baby blues afflicts up to 80 percent of new mothers, postpartum depression occurs in 10 to 20 percent of new mothers, and postpartum psychosis strikes 1 in 1,000 new mothers.”

I am a Psychiatrist. I am trained in Child, Adolescent and Adult Psychiatry and I have a bias. I believe that drugs are dangerous and, in the case of psychiatric drugs, outstandingly dangerous, often causing long-term damage to the nervous system and other organs which are then treated with more drugs since the signs of drug toxicity are virtually identical to the reasons the patient was given the drug(s) in the first place, only more so. These drugs, increasingly used on the vulnerable nervous systems of younger and younger children with no deep understanding of their impact on the developing brains and bodies are poorly tested, vastly oversold and represent a huge profit center. Their only problem, from the point of view of the pharmaceutical industry, is that there are large markets which are currently untouched. Once these drugs are administered, for whatever reason, they tend to become a legal habit supplied by your friendly pusher, your doctor. Although your pusher may be well-intentioned, his/her information about the safety and efficacy of these toxins (and make no mistake: they are known brain and liver toxins with a hefty dollop of endocrine disruption, pancreatic destruction and liver damage throw in for good measure) comes from the very people who make a profit from his/her use of these substances.

There is now, following nearly endless revelations in Congressional hearings, leaked information, legal actions against drug companies, etc., a clear patter of corruption and collusion to place dangerous drugs on the market and keep them there between the FDA and the manufacturers of these compounds.

With the collusion of the FDA, information on the dangers of these drugs, their tendency to increase suicidal and homicidal behaviors and their addictive impact are suppressed or minimized while new markets are sought out to allow the dream of Henry Gadsen to come true.

I think not! Remember, if we all think not, then we need to create a strong and effective grass roots organization to take this message to Congress (that’s what your emails do and what our Congressional education program does) and to the rest of America. That’s where your support comes in. Send this blog to your list. Ask them to visit the Natural Solutions Foundation website, www.HealthFreedomUSA.org and sign up for the free, secure and informative Health Freedom eAlerts (http://www.healthfreedomusa.
org/index.php?page_id=187).

And don’t forget donations: we really need your financial help. Your tax deductible donations make our work possible. Please consider making a generous recurring donation (http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?page_id=189) right now.

Natural Solutions Foundation and You: Together We are More Than Just Talk!

Yours in health and freedom,

Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org

Posted in Compulsory Drugging, Get Involved, Hall of Shame, Legislation to Oppose, Privacy | No Comments »

Text of “Mother’s Act”, S. 1375

Sunday, February 17th, 2008

Source: Thomas.loc.gov


MOTHERS Act (Introduced in Senate)

S 1375 IS

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1375

To ensure that new mothers and their families are educated about postpartum depression, screened for symptoms, and provided with essential services, and to increase research at the National Institutes of Health on postpartum depression.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

May 11, 2007

Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself, Mr. DURBIN, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. BROWN, Mr. DODD, and Mr. LAUTENBERG) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

A BILL

To ensure that new mothers and their families are educated about postpartum depression, screened for symptoms, and provided with essential services, and to increase research at the National Institutes of Health on postpartum depression.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Mom’s Opportunity to Access Health, Education, Research, and Support for Postpartum Depression Act’ or the `MOTHERS Act’ .

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds as follows:

(1) Postpartum depression is a devastating mood disorder which strikes many women during and after pregnancy.

(2) Postpartum mood changes are common and can be broken into three subgroups: `baby blues,’ which is an extremely common and the less severe form of postpartum depression; postpartum mood and anxiety disorders, which are more severe than baby blues and can occur during pregnancy and anytime within the first year of the infant’s birth; and postpartum psychosis, which is the most extreme form of postpartum depression and can occur during pregnancy and up to twelve months after delivery.

(3) `Baby blues’ is characterized by mood swings, feelings of being overwhelmed, tearfulness, irritability, poor sleep, mood changes, and a sense of vulnerability that usually starts in the first week and resolves without treatment by the end of the second week postpartum.

(4) The symptoms of postpartum mood and anxiety disorders are as defined in the latest edition of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), as published by American Psychological Association.

(5) The symptoms of postpartum psychosis include losing touch with reality, distorted thinking, delusions, auditory hallucinations, paranoia, hyperactivity, and rapid speech or mania.

(6) Baby blues afflicts up to 80 percent of new mothers, postpartum depression occurs in 10 to 20 percent of new mothers, and postpartum psychosis strikes 1 in 1,000 new mothers.

(7) The causes of postpartum depression are complex and unknown at this time; however, contributing factors include: a steep and rapid drop in hormone levels after childbirth; difficulty during labor or pregnancy; a premature birth; a miscarriage; feeling overwhelmed, uncertain, frustrated or anxious about one’s new role as a mother ; a lack of support from one’s spouse, friends or family; marital strife; stressful events in life such as death of a loved one, financial problems, or physical or mental abuse; a family history of depression or mood disorders; a previous history of major depression or anxiety; or a prior postpartum depression.

(8) Postpartum depression is a treatable disorder if promptly diagnosed by a trained provider and attended to with a personalized regimen of care including social support, therapy, medication, and when necessary hospitalization.

(9) All too often postpartum depression goes undiagnosed or untreated due to the social stigma surrounding depression and mental illness, the romanticization of motherhood, the new mother’s inability to self-diagnose her condition, the new mother’s shame or embarrassment over discussing her depression so near to the birth of her child, the lack of understanding in society and the medical community of the complexity of postpartum depression, and economic pressures placed on hospitals and providers.

(10) Untreated, postpartum depression can lead to further depression, substance abuse, loss of employment, divorce and further social alienation, self-destructive behavior, or even suicide.

(11) Untreated, postpartum depression impacts society through its effect on the infant’s physical and psychological and cognitive development, child abuse, neglect or death of the infant or other siblings, and the disruption of the family.

(12) This Act shares the goals of the Melanie Blocker-Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act and will help new mothers who are battling with postpartum conditions.

TITLE I–DELIVERY OF SERVICES REGARDING POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION AND PSYCHOSIS

SEC. 101. DELIVERY OF SERVICES REGARDING POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION AND PSYCHOSIS.

Subpart 3 of part B of title V of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290bb-31 et seq.) is amended–

(1) by inserting after the subpart heading the following:

`CHAPTER I–GENERAL PROVISIONS’;

and

(2) by adding at the end thereof the following:

`CHAPTER II–DELIVERY OF SERVICES REGARDING POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION AND PSYCHOSIS

`SEC. 520K. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM OF GRANTS.

`(a) In General- The Secretary shall in accordance with this chapter make grants to provide for projects for the establishment, operation, and coordination of effective and cost-efficient systems to–

`(1) provide education to women who have recently given birth, and their families, concerning postpartum depression, postpartum mood and anxiety disorders, and postpartum psychosis (referred to in this chapter as `postpartum conditions’) before such women leave their birthing centers and to screen new mothers for postpartum conditions during their first year of postnatal checkup visits, including the standard 6-week postnatal checkup visit; and

`(2) provide for the delivery of essential services to individuals with postpartum conditions and their families.

`(b) Recipients of Grants- A grant under subsection (a) may be made to an entity only if the entity–

`(1) is–

`(A) in the case of a grant to carry out the activities described in subsection (c)(1), a State; and

`(B) in the case of a grant to carry out the activities described in subsection (c)(2), a public or nonprofit private entity, which may include a State or local government; a public or nonprofit private hospital, community-based organization, hospice, ambulatory care facility, community health center, migrant health center, tribal government or territory, or homeless health center; or other appropriate public or nonprofit private entity; and

`(2) submits to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require.

`(c) Certain Activities-

`(1) EDUCATION-

`(A) IN GENERAL- To the extent practicable and appropriate, the Secretary shall ensure that projects under subsection (a)(1) develop policies and procedures to ensure that education concerning postpartum conditions is provided to women in accordance with subparagraph (B), that training programs regarding such education are carried out at health facilities within the State, and that screening and referral is provided in accordance with subparagraph (C).

`(B) REQUIREMENTS- A State that receives a grant or contract under subsection (a)(1) shall ensure that postpartum condition education complies with the following:

`(i) Physicians, certified nurse midwives, certified midwives, nurses, and other licensed health care professionals within the State who provide prenatal and postnatal care to women shall also provide education to women and their families concerning postpartum conditions to promote earlier diagnosis and treatment.

`(ii) All birthing facilities in the State shall provide new mothers and fathers, and other family members as appropriate, with complete information concerning postpartum conditions, including its symptoms, methods of coping with the illness, and treatment resources prior to such mothers leaving the birthing facility after a birth.

`(iii) Physicians, certified nurse midwives, certified midwives, nurses, and other licensed health care professionals within the State who provide prenatal and postnatal care to women shall include fathers and other family members, as appropriate, in both the education and treatment processes to help them better understand the nature and causes of postpartum conditions.

`(C) SCREENING AND REFERRAL- A State that receives a grant or contract under subsection (a)(1) shall ensure that new mothers, during visits to a physician, certified nurse midwife, certified midwife, nurse, or licensed healthcare professional who is licensed or certified by the State, within the first year after the birth of their child, are offered screenings for postpartum conditions by using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), or other appropriate tests. If the results of such screening provide warning signs for postpartum conditions, the new mother shall be referred to an appropriate mental healthcare provider.

`(D) SUBGRANTS- A State that receives a grant or contract under subsection (a)(1) to carry out activities under this paragraph may award subgrants to entities described in subsection (b)(1)(B) to enable such entities to provide education of this type described in subparagraph (B).

`(2) SERVICES- To the extent practicable and appropriate, the Secretary shall ensure that projects under subsection (a)(2) provide services for the diagnosis and management of postpartum conditions. Activities that the Secretary may authorize for such projects may also include the following:

`(A) Delivering or enhancing outpatient and home-based health and support services, including case management, screening and comprehensive treatment services for individuals with or at risk for postpartum conditions, and delivering or enhancing support services for their families.

`(B) Delivering or enhancing inpatient care management services that ensure the well being of the mother and family and the future development of the infant.

`(C) Improving the quality, availability, and organization of health care and support services (including transportation services, attendant care, homemaker services, day or respite care, and providing counseling on financial assistance and insurance) for individuals with postpartum conditions and support services for their families.

`(d) Integration With Other Programs- To the extent practicable and appropriate, the Secretary shall integrate the program under this title with other grant programs carried out by the Secretary, including the program under section 330.

`SEC. 520L. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

`The Secretary may provide technical assistance to assist entities in complying with the requirements of this chapter in order to make such entities eligible to receive grants under section 520K.

`SEC. 520M. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

`For the purpose of carrying out this chapter, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2010.’.

TITLE II–RESEARCH ON POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION AND PSYCHOSIS

SEC. 201. CONSENSUS RESEARCH CONFERENCE AND PLAN CONCERNING POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION AND PSYCHOSIS.

Part B of title IV of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 284 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`SEC. 409J. CONSENSUS RESEARCH CONFERENCE AND PLAN CONCERNING POSTPARTUM DEPRESSION AND PSYCHOSIS.

`(a) Consensus Research Conference and Plan-

`(1) CONFERENCE- The Secretary, acting through the Director of NIH, the Administrator of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and the heads of other Federal agencies that administer Federal health programs including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, shall organize a series of national meetings that are designed to develop a research plan for postpartum depression and psychosis (referred to in this section as `postpartum condition’).

`(2) PLAN- The Secretary, taking into account the findings of the research conference under paragraph (1), shall develop a research plan relating to postpartum conditions. Such plan shall include–

`(A) basic research concerning the etiology and causes of postpartum conditions;

`(B) epidemiological studies to address the frequency and natural history of postpartum conditions and the differences among racial and ethnic groups with respect to such conditions;

`(C) the development of improved diagnostic techniques relating to postpartum conditions; and

`(D) clinical research for the development and evaluation of new treatments for postpartum conditions, including new biological agents.

`(3) REPORT- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report concerning the research plan under paragraph (2).

`(b) Activity Relating to Research Plan-

`(1) IN GENERAL- After the development of the research plan under subsection (a)(1), the Secretary, acting through the Director of NIH shall expand and intensify research and related activities of the Institutes relating to postpartum conditions in a manner appropriate to carry out such plan, and in particular shall direct research efforts to carry out such plan.

`(2) REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the development of the research plan under subsection (a)(1), and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the progress made with respect to such plan and the status of ongoing activities regarding postpartum conditions at the National Institutes of Health.’.

Posted in Compulsory Drugging, Legislation to Oppose, Privacy | No Comments »

Vaccine Increases Risk of Convulsions, Pneumonia Deaths. FDA Ready to Approve Anyway. Buffet’s Stocks Support Company

Saturday, February 16th, 2008

The Natural Solutions Foundation keeps an eye on the news for you. And when we see relationships, we point them out. So we wonder:
1. Could the fact that Warren Buffet turned over a vast amount of money to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) be related to the fact that BMGF is in the process of making a great deal of that money back for him through its huge subsidies of vaccine manufacturers?
2. Could it be that the report that we have received that vaccines delivered by BMGF to third world countries have twice the mercury (thimerisol) present in American vaccines are true?
3. Could it be that the fact that the Rotavirus vaccine which causes and increased risk of pneumonia-related deaths and convulsions is slated for FDA approval anyway is not an accident or an oversight, but part of a program to extract every possible bit of profit from vulnerable populations regardless of the consequences to members of those populations (babies, for example)?
4. Could it be that the approval process by which FDA makes its decisions is so corrupted that no product or food approved by that organization can be assumed to be safe?
5. Could it be that the deaths of babies or their neurological damage is of little or no consequence to the decision-makers at the FDA and the corporate chiefs at the helms of the drug companies?

Read the two articles below and answer those questions for yourself. If your answer is “Yes” to those questions, you need the Natural Solutions Foundation on your side. Share this information widely. Sign up for the free and secure Natural Solutions Foundation Health Freedom eAlerts (http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?page_id=187) and make a generous recurring donation (http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?page_id=189) for a tax deductible way to safeguard your health and your health freedom.

Want more information on vaccinations and vaccine hazards? Join the No-Forced-Vaccination Forum today. Click here (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/no-forced-vaccination/join)
to become a member of this vital community of dedicated health freedom advocates focused on maintaining vaccination choice.

Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima

Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
FDA ties pneumonia deaths to infant vaccine
Agency panel considering approval of oral medicine for diarrhea virus

updated 11:20 a.m. ET Feb. 15, 2008

WASHINGTON – GlaxoSmithKline Plc’s rotavirus vaccine is associated with increased pneumonia-related deaths and other adverse reactions, U.S. regulatory staff said in documents posted on Friday.

The review comes ahead of a Food and Drug Administration advisory meeting next Wednesday to consider approval of the oral vaccine to prevent the most common cause of severe diarrhea and dehydration among infants and young children in the world.

FDA staff said its analysis of 11 studies revealed that in the largest trial, there was a statistically significant increase in deaths related to pneumonia compared with placebo, documents posted on the FDA’s Web site said.

That study, which enrolled about 63,000 children, also found an increase in convulsions in children given the drug, named Rotarix. Another study found an increased rate of bronchitis, compared with placebo.

In a conclusion section, the FDA documents noted the pneumonia-related deaths and convulsions, but did not appear to make a recommendation to the advisory panel.

That expert panel will weigh the staff review, but makes its own recommendation, which is typically followed by the FDA.

Triangle Business Journal
Friday, February 15, 2008 – 10:59 AM EST

GlaxoSmithKline’s [GSK] rotavirus vaccine, called Rotarix, is associated with an increased risk of convulsions and pneumonia-related deaths in children taking it, according to a review by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Rotovirus is the most common cause of severe diarrhea and dehydration among infants and young children.

The study, which enrolled about 63,000 children, found a statistically significant increase in convulsions and deaths related to pneumonia compared with a placebo, the review says.

The staff review is one consideration among many that an expert panel at the FDA will weigh when deciding whether to approve the drug.

The news comes shortly after Berkshire Hathaway, the company run by billionaire investor Warren Buffett, revealed in filings late Thursday that it has made a significant investment in GSK.

Buffett’s investment in GSK is valued at about $65.4 million and follows a series of Berkshire stock purchases in health-care companies, including UnitedHealth Group, WellPoint, Johnson & Johnson and Sanofi-Aventis SA.

GSK employs about 6,000 people in the Triangle, although the company recently announced a worldwide, three-year restructuring plan that will include significant job cuts.

GSK’s stock opened at $44 on Friday from a previous closing price of $43.32.

Posted in Medical Hazards, Vaccination | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »