Sunday May 19, 2013
Pediatricians and GMOsCarolyn Nance for Salem-News.com
Breast feeding is immunologically essential to an infant and baby and protective against a range of diseases.
(ANN ARBOR, MI) - Many pediatricians are undermining breast feeding. One hears this from mother after mother. Paraphrasing: "Even though the baby is nursing fine and I am happy to breast feed, my pediatrician said I should start the baby on formula at 6 months." "She asked me why I was so opposed to formula." "He said not to worry if the baby had trouble latching on, just use formula."
[B]reastfeeding and the use of human milk confer unique nutritional and nonnutritional benefits to the infant and the mother and, in turn, optimize infant, child, and adult health as well as child growth and development. Infant feeding should not be considered as a lifestyle choice but rather as a basic health issue. [Emphasis added.]
So why are pediatricians urging mothers to start formula? Are they unaware that infant formula can have as much sugar as a can of coke and that sugar is toxic? Do they not know that sugar is converted into ethanol in the body and acts on it just like alcohol, causing damage to the liver just as alcoholism does?
Do the pediatricians know that the sugar in infant formula is likely genetically engineered as well, and if so, would have been sprayed with Roundup which is strongly linked to Birth Defects?
If the formula is milk-based, is the pediatrician asking whether the formula is produced inChina? That milk is shipped over as milk solids and was contaminated with melamine which the FDA didn't ban but simply set a standard that protected the interests of the international formula companies.
Are pediatricians asking mothers whether the milk-based formula they buy is free of rBGH, a genetically engineered bovine hormone linked to breast, prostate and colon cancer? Or whether the cows producing the milk are fed with GM corn and GM soy? Feed from GM crops have develped a new pathogen linked to infertility and late term spontaneous abortions in the industrial dairy herd
If cows that are producing milk for baby formula are eating GM corn which is known to damage organs, is the pediatrician mentioning this? GM Corn Damages Liver and Kidneys
And the most serious question: Are pediatricians not aware that much of the infant formula here is soy-based and that soy is genetically engineered and linked to sterility? Genetically Modified Soy Linked to Sterility Are they telling parents that New Zealand has banned soy formula because it damages fertility?
Breast feeding is immunologically essential to an infant and baby and protective against a range of diseases. If a pediatrician is urging mothers to stop breast feeding, they apparent do not know perhaps the central thing a pediatrician must about delivering infant and child care. That being the case, are they not - to put things bluntly - medically incompetent as a pediatrician?
And if the pediatrician isn't informing mothers of significant threats posed by genetically engineered material (GMOs - genetically modified organisms - do not qualify as food) to the baby's health, life and future fertility, and yet urging GM-formula that could harm and even sterilize the baby, is that pediatrician not committing malpractice?
Almost all pediatricians in the US are forcing vaccines (containing patented GMOs as well) on their patients while not informing parents that every single vaccine mandated by the CDC vaccine schedule for infants and children and teens contains polysorbate 80, a "preferred ingredient" in a pharmaceutical industry patent for "a fertility impairing vaccine." Perhaps the pediatricians might need to see the formula themselves to and grasp the fact that polysorbate 80 is deemed effective enough as a sterilizing agent to be included in a patent to accomplish just that.
#5) On the World Intellectual Property Organization, a patent application for a "fertility impairing vaccine". The University of Georgia Research Foundation is listed as the patent applicant and Tween 80 (Polysorbate 80) as a preferred ingredient:
"In a preferred embodiment the vaccine comprises oil, preferably a biodegradable oil such as squalene oil, in an amount of about 2.5% to about 15%, preferably about 8% to about 12%. In preparing the vaccine it is advantageous to combine a concentrated oily adjuvant composition with an aqueous solution of the antigen, pZP glycoprotein. Typically, the vaccine is prepared using an adjuvant concentrate which contains lecithin (about 5% to about 15 % wt/vol, preferably about 12% wt/vol) and STDCM (preferably about 25 mg/mL to about 50 mg/mL) in squalene oil. The term % wt/vol means grams per 100 mL of liquid. The aqueous solution containing the isolated pZP glycoprotein is typically a phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution, and additionally preferably contains Tween 80 (about 0.2% vol/vol to about 0.8% vol/vol, preferably about 0.4% vol/vol)."
One would hope pediatricians are not already aware that they are forcing their vulnerable patients to be exposed from birth through 18 years of age, to 69 doses of this agent, and continuing to do so, regardless.
If pediatricians are so out of touch that they do not know that both soy and polysorbate 80 damages fertility, perhaps all pediatricians need to be interviewed by parents to decide if the pediatrician they might select is competent in terms of crucial information on 1). what is in baby formula and 2). what is in the vaccines, both of which many are forcing onto children, increasing the likelihood that their patients will become sterile over time. Without the doctor having this information themselves, how can possibly provide "informed consent" to parents? As it stands now with mandated vaccines, parents are missing core information about the danger of the vaccines, and information on the availability of vaccine exemptions is withheld, so they are not consenting. They are being forced to submit their child to a procedure that can potentially sterilize them.
Rats forced to eat GMO soy become sterile. From the Institute for Responsible Technology:
And rats became infertile when forced to be injected with polysorbate 80:
Pediatricians who do not have this essential information and are imposing substances on children that seriously threaten that ability to be fertile, need to become aware. If they are uninterested or dismissive, parents will be better able to determine if they are competent protectors of children's health.
"The damning study against polysorbate 80 that Organic Health refers to above was a Slovakian study published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology in 1993. The researchers injected female rats with Tween 80 (in 1, 5 or 10 percent aqueous solution), on days four through seven after birth.
"They discovered that Tween80 [polysorbate 80] accelerated the rats' maturation, prolonged the estrous cycle, decreased the weight of the uterus and ovaries, and caused damage to the lining of the uterus indicative of chronic estrogenic stimulation.
"The rats' ovaries were also damaged, with degenerative follicles and no corpora lutea (a mass of progesterone-secreting endocrine tissue that forms immediately after ovulation)."
Parent groups might initiate a petition to the CDC, demanding the removal of polysorbate 80 from all vaccines for children and of adults of child-bearing age and that food for the poor (under the WIC program and other programs) not be held hostage to taking vaccines that can sterilize. Parent might also commit themselves to informing as many other parents as possible, both about polysorbate 80 in the vaccines and that they can opt of childhood vaccines for their children by filing vaccine exemptions - whether medical, philosophical or religious. It is not clear whether adults can also opt out but they certainly have the strongest possible grounds now for refusal.
When childhood vaccines and other vaccines (such as the flu vaccine that was so deadly to fetuses) contain an ingredient that attacks and damages sexual organs, any of the three exemptions options should more than qualify. For such vaccines are medically outrageous, philosophically outrageous, and religiously immoral.
For states to refuse these exemptions is for them to sanction covert compulsory sterilization of children and others. Law firms would certainly be eager to take such cases and the defend families' rights to refuse (on behalf of their minor children) the federal or state government "imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group" - which is defined as genocide.
Articles for August 10, 2012 | Articles for August 11, 2012 | Articles for August 12, 2012
|Contact: email@example.com | Copyright © 2013 Salem-News.com | news tips & press releases: firstname.lastname@example.org.|