by Mark Sircus

June 11, 2013

from DrSircus Website
 

 

 

Before I say a word in this essay I want everyone to see the true care that newborns and young children deserve:

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is my deepest belief/feeling that we all deserve this kind of love as we touch town on this planet because we need all the love we can get to withstand all the difficulties we will face with life on earth.

 

For years I have written about malpractice in oncology and pediatrics and I wonder upon parents who drag their kids to doctors only to have them seriously abused by them. Our entire civilization is built upon abusive behaviors and attitudes so no one should be surprised when I say that doctors abuse children and should be charged for child abuse.

 

Just because the abuse is not sexual in nature does not excuse the offense.

 

If you think I am on extreme territory with these statements please read what Glenn Harlan Reynolds, professor of law at the University of Tennessee wrote:

For a while, Iíve been wondering if itís parental malpractice to put your kids in public schools. More and more, itís gone beyond wondering.

 

For example, last week the Washington Post reported a nasty case of abusive behavior by school officials in Calvert County, Maryland:

A five-year-old who brought a cowboy-style cap pistol on a school bus - orange-tipped, and something that no one could possibly mistake for a real gun - was interrogated for two hours (an interrogation that was so long, or so stressful, that he wet his pants) and then suspended for 10 days. Who treats a five-year-old that way?

Doctors do when they clobber kids with multiple vaccines and then clean up their mess with abusive applications of antibiotics that make kids weaker and weaker.

 

Governments seem to like nothing better than to interfere as much as possible with each and everyoneís life. Governments are bastions of depraved power and this is clearly demonstrated by the CDC, the FDA, the Department of Health and Human Resources as well as the Institute of Medicine.

 

The FDA has actually "certified" a 2009 letter sent anonymously by FDA staff to President Obama describing "systemic corruption and wrongdoing that permeates all levels of FDA."

"Prescription drugs kill some 200,000 Americans every year. Will that number go up now that most clinical trials are conducted overseas - on sick Russians, homeless Poles, and slum-dwelling Chinese - in places where regulation is virtually nonexistent, the FDA doesnít reach, and Ďmistakesí can end up in pauperís graves?

 

The authors investigate the globalization of the pharmaceutical industry, and the U.S. Governmentís failure to rein in a lethal profit machine," wrote Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele at the beginning of 2011.

When it comes to delivering babies aggressive contemporary medicine is failing.

 

Amnesty International is saying that too many women are dying while having babies in the United States. In a new report on pregnancy and childbirth care in the U.S., Amnesty details the maternal health care crisis in this country as part of a systemic violation of womenís rights.

 

The report, titled "Deadly Delivery," notes that the likelihood of a woman dying in childbirth in the U.S. is five times greater than in Greece, four times greater than in Germany, and three times greater than in Spain.[1]

 

Every day in the U.S., more than two women die of pregnancy-related causes, with the maternal mortality ratio doubling from 6.6 deaths per 100,000 births in 1987 to 13.3 deaths per 100,000 births in 2006. And as shocking as these figures are Amnesty notes that the actual number of maternal deaths in the U.S. may be a lot higher since there are no federal requirements to report these outcomes.

 

According to Amnesty, which gathered data from many sources including the CDC, approximately half of the pregnancy-related deaths in the U.S. are the result of systemic failures like inducing labor and delivering via cesarean section.

 

 

Doctors are too often demanding repeat cesarean
deliveries for pregnant women after a first C-section.
National Institutes of Health

 

 

 

 

 

The Terror of Pediatric Medicine

"My daughter took her youngest son Chris to the pediatrician for a one-year check-up. Chris is a special needs child. At six months he was given vaccines and within 24 hours began having serious seizures. Friday, he came in with a fever, coughing and runny nose.

 

The nurse, by the pediatricianís orders, came in without asking, without signatures, and gave him a flu shot, adding five other shots with it. As of this morning, Chris was dead."

Parents around the world need to stop doing whatever the pediatricians tell them to do and need to be educated and aware of the dangers that serious harm can be inflicted upon their young charges by medicines, vaccinations and various treatments.

 

 

"The greatest lie ever told is that
vaccines are safe and effective."
Dr. Len Horowitz

 

 

"Murder or Bad Vaccine" was the title of a chilling article from the September 2000 issue of Redbook magazine.

 

In this startling feature, several fathers were accused of shaking their babies, when, in fact, a vaccine had caused a reaction that caused the children to have problems. In one such case an anesthesiologist was convicted and is serving a jail sentence for killing his child even though many experts had shown that the brain hemorrhage suffered by his baby was the result of a "hot lot" of bad vaccine.

 

In the early 1900s an astute Indiana physician, Dr. W.B. Clarke, stated,

"Cancer was practically unknown until compulsory vaccination with cowpox vaccine began to be introduced. I have had to deal with 200 cases of cancer, and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated person."

 

 

The walls of deception - that vaccines are necessary, safe,
or effective - are cracking. Each week, fewer people are
figuratively deaf or blind, and fewer are simple-mindedly naÔve.
Dr. Suzanne Humphries

 

 

The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) said that the strong-smelling chemical formaldehyde causes cancer. The NIH said that people with higher measures of exposure to formaldehyde are at increased risk for certain types of cancers.[2]

 

Can anyone in their right mind tell me why we would find formaldehyde in some vaccines and mercury in others and aluminum and a list of other nasty chemicals?

 

Dr. Suzanne Humphries writes,

"Itís fall in the northern hemisphere and more than one type of darkness has set in. Vaccines are being injected at lightning speed. New vaccines, untested vaccines, double-strength flu vaccines for the over-65 group; none of which have been shown to be effective at keeping anyone healthy.

 

The naÔve are lining up at clinics, shopping malls, and retail stores.

 

They donít know which kind of vaccine they will receive.

  • Which manufacturer is it?

  • Does it have mercury?

  • What chemicals does it contain?

  • Why should they care?

  • Why would they not trust their doctor (or their local pharmacist)?"

Mike Adams the Health Ranger speaks heavily against the allopathic medical empire saying,

"American medical doctors have utterly failed the American people, their trusting patients. Millions of Americans are dying unnecessarily.

 

They are the brutalized and agonized victims of indiscriminate manslaughter, crucified by the premeditated malpractice of a totally misinformed and misguided American medical community.

 

To add insult to injury, this disgraceful and dishonorable malpractice on living human beings is motivated by only money and sheer stupidity, avarice and ruinous medical application. Most medical doctors should have their licenses revoked at once."

Back in 2004, a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) documented a relationship between breast cancer and antibiotic use.[3]

"After a brief flurry, the study quietly faded from the publics - and modern medicines - consciousness. What makes this newsworthy is that the study has not been contradicted. In seven years, a study that demonstrates a severe risk from one of modern medicineís most vaunted methods is still the final word, yet its importance is utterly ignored," wrote Heidi Stevenson.

Modern medicine seems to ignore whatever is not convenient and whatever cuts into its profits no matter how many people get hurt and for this the consequence should be high.

 

Certainly the public is paying dearly being mowed down in increasing numbers as they are and who needs concentration camps when we have modern medicine behaving like Nazi doctors. 

 

Both I and Mike Adams might seem extreme but, are we?

 

Its blasphemy to attack the men and women in white coats who have licenses to practice pharmaceutical medicine and in reality itís not worth that much thought because the best way to deal with this is to simply walk away from the medical system.

 

For chronic diseases one might as well go to a butcher shop then walk into a clinic of an orthodox rank and file member of the AMA.

 

 

 

 

The Terror of Modern Medicine Does Not Stop

 

Doctors are lighting up their patientsí cells with high dosages of radiation, and the government is not doing anything about it except hide the dangers as much as possible from its citizens.

 

Researchers from the University of California at San Francisco studied the average dose of radiation delivered to over 1,000 patients who underwent 11 of the most common types of diagnostic CT scans. They found that the amount of radiation delivered by each scan varied widely.

 

Even when looking at the same type of scan on the same part of the body, one personís radiation exposure could be as much as 13 times higher than anotherís.

 

Researchers from the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda developed a risk model to estimate how many future cancers the CT scans given to patients in 2007 would likely cause. According to their analysis, CT scans given in 2007 would cause about 29,000 cancers at some point in the future. Those most likely to cause cancer were ones of the abdomen, pelvis, chest, and head as well as those delivered to patients aged 35 to 54.[4]

 

Radiation treatment for breast cancer is becoming increasingly popular despite lack of good evidence that it is safe or effective.

 

Use of the therapy, which irradiates only a portion of the breast instead of standard whole-breast radiation after lumpectomy, climbed more than 10-fold between 2001 and 2006 with these rates collating almost exclusively with two factors:

  1. approval of a device used to deliver the radiation in 2002

  2. Medicare reimbursement in 2004

Oncologists are playing with the death principle, for that is exactly what this kind of radiation is.

 

Far infrared on the other hand offers the exact opposite and can even be used instead of the dangerous nuclear-type of radiation used in the treatment of cancers today.

 

 

 

 

References