vaccine cancer legislative action form for overvaccination

evidence-based cancer treatment — the discipline that insists on proof that time-honored medical practices and procedures are actually effective.
No ancedotal stuff please.
Pet cancer treatment can cost ten thousand USA dollars. This forum is for people to tell us how they were able to obtain cancer treatment when they had no pet health insurance to cover the cost. Rabie Vaccine caused cancer often is paid for by the company that produced the vaccine even when not legally required to do so.

vaccine cancer legislative action form for overvaccination

Postby guest » Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:38 pm

legislative action form to fill out to stop vaccine cancer

We also strongly suggest adding your own personal paragraph, especially if your pet has experienced an adverse reaction to vaccinations.




****
The Honorable (full name)
U.S. Senate
Washington, DC 20510

or

The Honorable (full name)
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington DC 20515

Dear Senator (name) or Representative (name):

Many companion animals are becoming sick and dying due to a type veterinary care that would normally save our pets lives ... routine vaccinations. Two of the most serious adverse reactions include Feline Vaccine Associated Sarcoma (VAS), which is a cancerous tumor that forms at the injection site of vaccinations and Canine Auto-Immune Hemolytic Anemia (AIHA). Both VAS and AIHA can be deadly despite extremely aggressive and costly treatment protocols.

While veterinarians commonly discuss the benefits of vaccinations with their clients, it is imperative that they also educate their clients concerning any known risk associated with the vaccination process as well . This would give pet owners the opportunity to make educated decisions regarding the care of their beloved pets. Consent forms describing the benefits and risks of vaccinations are warranted and should be distributed to all animal lovers by their veterinarians.

In addition, a truth in labeling law for Rabies vaccines is highly advised. Unbelievably, with the USDA's approval, some of the current three year rabies vaccines are relabeled and used as one year products. Many animals are receiving a three-year dose every year and most families are not aware that this over-vaccinating is happening.

A "veterinary vaccine injury act" should be enacted. This fund would help compensate families who have suffered negative consequences of any vaccination mandated by law as well as also help fund the development of safer vaccines and vaccine technology. (i.e. alternative routes of administration, such as Heska's intranasal; blood titer tests to determine immunity)

The government, in cooperation with the veterinary professional community, should enact and enforce a "standard" set of guidelines concerning the frequency and location for the administration of both feline and canine vaccinations. Veterinarians should then be held accountable to this "standard of care".

Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter, which holds great importance to many pet owners.

Sincerely,
guest
 

reporting VAS USP USDA AVMA manufacture

Postby guest » Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:08 am

How are you and your vets now reporting VAS? I used to report VAS through USP
but recently heard they had been disbanded. I've read other places that say
you should call the manufacturer, USDA and AVMA. The USP used to send the
report to the manufacturer and USDA for you. I'm not sure that I'm trusting enough
to just tell the manufacturer. Obviously there is a conflict of interests and
they may just "misplace" some unfavorable reports. It is a major problem, as
the USP was a gateway for reporting of any problems with vaccines. As to the
AVMA, it will fall on deaf ears as the AVMA pulled their funding of the Vaccine
Associated Fibro-Sarcoma Task Force (VAFSTF) last year. As for the USDA they
are having their problems right now with whistle blower USDA employed vets
saying they must lie to keep their job in the USDA. The USDA looks the other way
and approves relabeling three year rabies vaccines with one year labels.
good luck,
guest
 

United States Pharmacopeia's (USP) Veterinary Practitioner

Postby guest » Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:11 am

United States Pharmacopeia's (USP) Veterinary Practitioners'
Reporting Program was terminated as of April 30, 2003. See this link
for details - http://www.usp.org/frameset.htm?
http://www.usp.org/prn/vprp.htm .

By following links on that site, I found out that you can report
adverse reactions to vaccines to the following:

1. USDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) - see
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/contactcvm/contactCVM.html#adr with a mailed
form (http://www.fda.gov/cvm/forms/fda1932a.pdf) or by calling them.
The form is a PDF file that prints out including envelope with pre-
paid postage.

2. USDA's Center for Veterinary Biologics (CVB) - see
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/cvb/ic/adv ... report.htm with a
mailed form or online.
guest
 

USDA and mad cow

Postby guest » Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:13 am

http://www.newfarm.org/depts/readermail ... 02_3.shtml
Man who shot the mad cow takes aim at USDA
After witnessing what he described as a blatant cover-up, this former slaughterhouse worker resigns in protest and undertakes a one-man crusade to expose the truth about BSE in the USA.

Editor’s NOTE: from New Farm

We serve a diverse audience of readers engaged in regenerative, organic and sustainable agriculture at many levels for many reasons. We want to hear from you about the issues that are important to your life and work, and your vision for agriculture that builds a strong future.

We run selected comments from readers in this space. Please tell us who you are, with name, address and phone number for verification. Sending correspondence to us conveys a right to us to publish it as is, or in a form edited for length and/or style. Opinions expressed in this space do not necessarily represent the perspective of The New Farm® or The Rodale Institute®.

If you have something important to say about agriculture in a sustainable global food system, please -- speak to us.

NF




April 2, 2004: My name is Dave Louthan. I’m the guy who shot the mad cow. I worked at Vern’s Moses Lake Meats in Washington state up until the day the test results on the Sunny Dene Ranch cow came back positive for BSE. Since then I’ve been hammering at the USDA and trying to expose the truth about BSE in the United States. I am a whistle blower.

The USDA started covering up the mad cow problem the minute word slipped out they had found a positive BSE sample. U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman and Dr. Ron DeHaven, the country’s chief veterinary officer, jumped in front of the cameras and said they had a presumptive positive mad cow but it was not in the food chain. That was not the truth. They said the cow was a downer. Also not true. That cow was a good walker and, as we all know now, that cow was eaten—all of it, and by a lot of people who would never have eaten it if they had been warned. The USDA decided it would hurt business if people were warned, so they covered up the truth and continue to do so.

The State of California is so mad about the constant deception that on March 25 they introduced legislation to cause all beef killed in California and all beef brought into California to be tested. That sound you hear is me standing on my chair applauding.

The USDA says they will now test 201,000 sick and crippled cows and 20,000 healthy ones—not today, but in a few months. Since the December 24 positive testing for BSE and June, how many diseased cattle will have been killed and eaten? One for sure. Remember the 60 missing from the herd of 81? While the USDA held back the testing, the farmers rushed those cows to slaughter. Now when June gets here, the USDA will predictably announce a 2 or 3 month delay getting the program started. And so on.

NEWS UPDATE APRIL 15: Beef producer's bid to test all its cattle for BSE denied

Now is the most dangerous time to eat beef. Here's the scary part: According to the USDA’s recently drafted BSE Surveillance Plan, each year an estimated 251,500 cows die of unknown reasons or reasons that could be consistent with BSE-related clinical signs. Let me translate that for you. The same people who kept telling you the meat was safe are now saying that 251,000 cows may have died of BSE in one year; 251,000. This information is available to you at
www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/issues/bse/BSE_S ... -15-04.pdf.

They announced this new program not out of concern for the safety of the citizenry but because of pressure put on them by the government, the consumer, and by our export partners Japan and South Korea. Dr. DeHaven states that it’s not for safety but to determine prevalence. That's what they were doing when all those poor people ate that mad cow in December. I don't want to learn about prevalence while I eat contaminated beef. I want the USDA to start testing the beef I'm eating and kids are eating right now. Today.

They say they will test 201,000 sick cows and 20,000 old cows. This is called scientific statistical testing. Dr. DeHaven says that if there are five sick cows in the country this method will find them. More hogwash.

Let me explain statistical sampling. Let's say you have a football stadium full of people. You bring out one person and test him for a highly communicable disease. If he passes you say everybody in the stadium is presumed healthy. That's statistical testing. It is obvious even to me that statistical testing only works for BSE screening if by some fluke you happen to get a sample from a sick cow. If you have 100 cows lined up and the first five are sick but you only test the last five, you are not going to find any sick cows. Period.

These people need to stop messing around with science they understand and start allowing the professional beef producers to test their own beef. Dr. DeHaven also pointed out that the USDA thinks it will find the prevalence of this disease to be very low. "But keep it in perspective," he said. USDA says it anticipates some positive results at the initial screening level. "Keep in mind there may be false positives," Dr. DeHaven said. Translation in my mind: If we find any positives, we will try to cover it up or deny them at every opportunity.

These people have compromised their integrity through their calculated deception, and now there is no way I'm going to believe a single word they say. Here is another shocker for you: They are still allowing blood and gelatin into the feed supply. The interim rules they announced were just suggestions because feeding the cows blood was not safe. The actual rules will not be ready for "a few months." Not to mention all the mountains of contaminated feed all ready on site. There is no way the ranchers are going to throw away feed they paid good money for. Would you?

Everything I have said here is easily verifiable.

Take care,

Dave
guest
 

USDA vets: Documents falsified for years

Postby guest » Mon Apr 26, 2004 10:15 am

USDA vets: Documents falsified for years By Steve Mitchell
United Press International
Published 4/23/2004 12:51 PM
WASHINGTON, April 23 (UPI) -- The U.S. Department of Agriculture has pressured its veterinarians into falsifying official documents for as long as 20 years, former agency veterinarians told United Press International.

The allegations come as a current USDA veterinarian and an attorney representing federal veterinarians have made similar charges about existing internal practices at the agency's Food Safety and Inspection Service.

The veterinarian -- who requested anonymity because of feared repercussions from the agency -- and the attorney, Bill Hughes of the National Association of Federal Veterinarians, allege the present FSIS management takes retaliatory actions against veterinarian inspectors who do not obey orders from superiors to sign certificates that falsely assert certain food items are safe for export.

These so-called export certificates declare a food item has been prepared in accordance with the safety inspection requirements of foreign countries. In some cases, Hughes and the veterinarian charge, even though food items may violate those export requirements, veterinarian inspectors still are expected to sign the documents.

Former veterinarians said the practice has been condoned in the agency for up to 20 years.

"We signed export certificates almost daily ... without ever verifying their accuracy," Tom D'Amura, a veterinarian who spent 12 years with the agency before leaving in 2000, told UPI.

"It probably still goes on," D'Amura said, and added he maintains contact with current USDA veterinarians.

Lester Friedlander, a former USDA veterinarian who worked for the agency from 1985 to 1995, said falsification of export certificates "has been ongoing for 20 years."

USDA spokesman Steven Cohen told UPI the FSIS was not aware of any current problems with its export certification process and "would launch an investigation" if it learned about management pressuring veterinarians to sign false documents.

Hughes currently is representing two agency veterinarians who were suspended for two weeks without pay when they balked at signing certificates they thought was inaccurate.

In one case, a veterinarian had cited a firm for infractions on two different days when employees were preparing poultry products for export to Russia. Because the infractions were specific violations of Russia's inspection requirements, the veterinarian refused to sign the export certificates for the poultry products processed during those two days.

Plant employees complained and the veterinarian's immediate supervisor and district manager ordered her to sign the export certificate. She again refused and ultimately was charged with improper conduct. The FSIS has rejected two of her appeals and Hughes recently filed a third appeal on her behalf on Feb. 20.

William Milton, assistant administrator at the FSIS, who rejected the latest appeal in the case, declined a request from UPI to comment on the allegations of export certificate falsification.

The accuracy of export certificates has been an issue for years at the agency. In 1981, Hughes handled the cases of four veterinarians who were threatened with disciplinary action for not signing export certificates for products they had not inspected personally.

The issue came to a head in 1999, when pressure from the media forced USDA to address complaints from the National Association of Federal Veterinarians, which represents about 80 percent of the 900 veterinarians employed by the FSIS.

That year, FSIS officials issued a new directive clarifying how veterinarians should handle export certificates. The 1999 directive, which remains in place today, advises veterinarians they should sign only certificates they can verify as accurate.

Friedlander said he was forced to sign false export certificates during his stint in the early 1990s as chief veterinary inspector at a Pennsylvania meatpacking plant.

"I was pressured into it all the time," he said, noting if the plant staff thought the veterinarian inspector was holding up their operations they would complain to USDA management, which in turn pressured the veterinarian to speed up the certification process.

"I would be doing my regular job and then all of a sudden over the intercom, they would page me to come to export," Friedlander said. "If I didn't sign them, they'd (plant employees) call up Washington, D.C., and complain to higher management. Then I'd get a call from my supervisor urging me to sign the export certificates because the company is in a rush."

Friedlander noted he often could not take the time to do a proper inspection because it would require opening the packages and inspecting the products and then resealing the packages and putting them back.

"It could be cocaine in there and then stamped as beef tenderloins? Who the hell knows? It sounds funny, but it's true," he said. "And a lot of these countries (receiving U.S. products) don't know that."

Friedlander noted he has heard similar stories from other USDA veterinarians, including some who currently are employed by the agency.

"A lot of these veterinarians have said, 'I just sign it, I don't even look at it,'" he said.
guest
 


Return to cancer treatment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron