Every thirty seconds approximately 1000 animals are abused and killed in order for pharmaceutical companies and so-called scientific researchers to justify their existence and provide profit for themselves and their bosses. Some animals are specifically bred for this purpose, others are taken from the wild and many are family pets simply picked up from the streets and condemned to a life of pain and extreme distress. The vast majority of these experiments are done without veterinary supervision by scientists who, in three-quarters of cases, use no anaesthetics. In Britain there are only twenty Home Office inspectors to cover 20 thousand licensed animal experimenters and figures indicate a rise in infringement of the rules of vivisection.

Animal experiments for allegedly medical purposes help no one but the experimenters, as results are unreliable due to the vast physiological differences between animals and humans. Results from animal based research often lead to dangerous drugs being released onto an unwary public. Nowadays the majority of doctors throughout the world recognise the absurdity of the situation but have little choice but to use the drugs provided by the pharmaceutical companies. Indeed the whole of western medicine is controlled by those businessmen at the top of the ladder who put money before humanity.

Virtually all of our present medical system is based upon the research and pursuit of chemical drugs despite the existence of many safe natural cures for the majority of the diseases being researched. The reason for this is very sinister indeed.

In the early half of this century the petrochemical giants organised a coup on the medical research establishments, hospitals and universities. They did this by sponsoring research and donating monetary gifts to all research which was drug based. Those who were not drug based were refused funding and were soon dissolved in favour of the more lucrative pharmaceutical-based projects. In 1939 the "Drug Trust" was formed by the Rockerfeller Empire (built upon Standard Oil) and I.G. Farben (best known as the manufacturers of Zyclon B, the gas allegedly used to kill Jews in the death camps). This company used the inmates of Auschwitz as slave labour at their massive chemical plant during the war and worked at least 25,000 inmates to death; others were killed in their drug testing program. After the war, I.G. Farben became Hoechst and Beyer, currently the first and third largest pharmaceutical giants in the world and initially employed convicted war criminals as board members. The Rockerfeller Empire now owns over half of the USA's pharmaceutical interests. Since the war the drug industry has steadily netted an ever increasing profit from sales of drugs to become the second largest manufacturing industry in the world.

It is NOT a case of choosing between animal research and human lives, as is the argument put forward by experimenters in order to justify their vast salaries. Practising doctors treat results of animal experiments with the contempt they deserve; only pharmaceutical companies, who fund the research, listen to the results of these misguided scientists. And even these companies are selective about the reports they choose to listen to, only publicising those which support the safety or effectiveness of the drug they wish to unleash on the public. There are alternatives: tests can be performed on cultures of human cells identical to those the drug will be interacting with when taken by the people they are designed for; a computer program has even been developed which accurately simulates the physiological systems of the human body. Vivisection is an evil trade playing on our emotional vulnerability and ignorance as well as the cheap vulnerability of the animal kingdom.

Most perversely of all, however, is the fact that there already exist many cures for the diseases which are being so vigorously researched and which have been suppressed by vested interests and governmental agencies world-wide. For example, in the USA the single largest opposition to natural remedies is the Food and Drug Administration agency whose top 150 operators own stock in the pharmaceutical industry. There is, at present, a campaign by the FDA in the US to register all natural therapies as pharmaceuticals which requires extensive tests on all of these products in order to isolate their active ingredients. They are quite happy to allow dangerous products such as Nutrasweet (aspartame - this has been shown to cause brain cancers and epilepsy among many other diseases and is probably the most dangerous food additive known to man) to be used on a widespread basis whilst banning such products as stevia, an artificial sweetener which has been used for hundreds of years and has no known side-effects. Interestingly, five of the members of the FDA who presided over the decision to pass aspartame as safe for public consumption subsequently left the FDA to take up positions in the Nutrasweet company.

As another example of the medical conspiracy; would it shock you to find out that there are in use today several medically proven cures for cancer and AIDS? One such cure is Essiac and has been in use since at least 1922; it has virtually no known adverse side effects. It is made from four common herbs and elevates the immune system. In 1937 it came within three votes of being legalised as a cancer treatment in Canada and was passed on to the British Cancer Campaign by its founder, Rene Caisse, via the Prince of Wales. And yet today, it is still only available, as are the others, through selected, virtually underground, outlets world-wide. I have many dozens of case studies myself which testify to the efficacy of this treatment.

Furthermore, in the 1930s a man named Royal Raymond Rife developed a very high powered microscope, almost seven times more powerful than those in use at the time, which could detect organisms which cause cancer and which mutate between bacteria-like states according to their environment. He did this by illuminating these organisms at their own specific frequency of light and could, therefore, examine them and their effects whilst they remained alive as opposed to killing them first using dye stains or high powered electron microscopy as is the norm today. He then discovered that, by bombarding these organisms with higher frequencies, he could destroy them. He discovered that it was possible to create and destroy cancers at will and succeeded in curing otherwise terminal patients of this disease, as well as others such as polio and typhus, in almost 100% of cases.

To this day conventional researchers maintain that the exact cause of cancer is unknown whilst many others who claim that they do know are frequently the victims of a conspiracy of suppression by governmental agencies and corporate business interests. They are often arrested and all research confiscated.

We know how to prevent and cure ALL disease, and yet vivisectors continue to ply their barbaric trade in the hope to find treatments to eradicate merely the symptoms of these diseases by persuading us that there is no other way forward and that either the animals suffer or we do.

It is vital that we understand the true nature of disease if we are to be effective in its eradication. It is imperative that we use the total sum of our knowledge to combat disease and work together as a multi-disciplinarian society, not in isolated, self-interested units. We must open our eyes to the realities and seek the best of conventional and unconventional medicine. We must concentrate on why we are ill and not simply seek to eradicate symptoms of disorders which we often see as inevitable. Disease is not our natural state, it is not inevitable. It is an outward physical display of disharmony whose cause is far more significant than its symptoms. The responsibility for health lies with all of us, not only with doctors or governments.

How many millions flock to the doctor and expect some treatment for a symptom, caring not for the cause but seeking only the relief of discomfort? And who is to blame them? They are victims of the pharmaceutical conspiracy too. According to these scientists, and medical practitioners who find employment within the System, there is little evidence to give credence to any form of medicine other than their own. Or so they and we are told. Money and power are great motivators.

It is a well known fact that the Ministry of Defence use animals in their research into biochemical warfare, and also as models for testing weaponry and field medicine. Dogs, cats, monkeys, goats and all sorts of animals are used for this barbaric and wholly negative research. They are shot from various ranges to give medics live practice of field medicine and are drugged and tortured to examine the effects of sinister poisons. At the end of the second World War we were horrified to discover the truth about Nazi atrocities and their chemical and genetic research, and rightly condemned this all time ethical low in weaponry development. However, immediately after the war the Allies dismantled the same German laboratories and set them up in Britain to continue that very same research in the name of "Defence". The main centre of MoD. research is at a place called Porton Down in Wiltshire.

It is less well known that the research carried out on animals in the name of medicine is ineffective, dangerous to ourselves and largely a con devised by the pharmaceutical companies. These companies dominate the whole of western medicine and control it by sponsoring most medical research. It is no surprise then that the results of virtually all medical research call for drugs as a solution. In this way doctors have become slaves to business and health comes secondary to profit. Drugs companies thrive on our ill health and have a vested interest in maintaining it to the tune of billions of pounds per day.

Each time a new drug is devised it must, by law, be tested and approved as safe which, in the vast majority of cases, means by vivisection (although there is no British law which states that new drugs must be tested on animals). This usually means using the Lethal Dose 50% (LD50) test which gives a level of toxicity rating depending on how much of a chemical is required to kill half of a large number of animals. Most drugs, however, after being passed as "safe" via animal testing have been later withdrawn from the market as they are usually found to be harmful to humans. Conversely, there are also, no doubt, many cures in nature which have not even been put to trial on humans because they failed the first stage and were found to be toxic to animals. For example, give a cat Paracetamol and it will die, yet it is an excellent painkiller for humans. The bottom line is that animal biology is not compatible as a source for research, they react in entirely different ways to humans and each species of animal also has an entirely different physiology from the others, not to mention individual variations within species types.

All drugs have side effects even those which are classified as "safe" for us to use. The vast majority of drugs taken by our society mask the symptoms of the disease and do little to cure the inherent problem. Many of us do ourselves more harm this way, often encouraged by our GP who knows little more than what the drugs company tells him. When was the last time you heard of a doctor advising a course of reflexology, acupuncture or herbal medicine, not to mention, heaven forbid, psychic healing? And we pay, via taxes and prescription charges, for this "health service"!?

We contribute in this way to man's torture of animals and to our own detriment in order to line the coffers of the mega-rich.

As a nurse I was told only the party line all the way through training and in practise. I had to learn copious amounts of information regarding names, uses and side effects of drugs, the latest dressings and wonder cures. Never once did anyone at any time mention any form of alternative thinking on causes and cures of illness which ventured outside of the drug orientated classic western medical model even though most of them are less harmful and many are more effective than conventional medicine.

In fact, any symptom of physical disease is an indication of disharmony in our entire make up of the holistic self. To ignore this fact is to ignore the disease and place ourselves in jeopardy. The primary aim of the western medical system is to eradicate these symptoms in order to return the patient to their "normal" state of health, usually having given scant regard to the fact that it was precisely certain factors in the patient's "normal" which prompted the symptoms in the first place.

Still, it's good news for the drugs companies isn't it?

Equally abhorrent, is the use of animals to test cosmetics and toiletries which serve no real use except to pamper our vanity. Animals do not wear make-up or perfume or use shampoo so why torture them with the constituent chemicals used in their manufacture? What ludicrous and misguided nonsense.

The Draize Test involves dripping toxic substances into the eyes of animals in order to study their damaging effects. Rabbits are the animal of choice for this test as they have no tears and, therefore, cannot wash away the products in this manner. The result of this test usually only results in deciding whether a warning should be placed on a products container or not.

We cannot continue to use animals as commodities just because they are cheaper than the alternatives.

by Dr Vernon Coleman

The truth is very different.

I have filing cabinets filled with research papers from universities and institutions around the world and there seems to be no end to the variety of indignities that researchers can think up for the unfortunate animals in their power

Vivisection is unbelievably barbaric and unforgivably cruel. It is also worthless, wasteful, inaccurate, uninformative and dangerously misleading. And it is done with your money by scientists who claim that they are performing their evil rituals on your behalf.

Some of the lies animal experimenters tell:

1. They say that animals that are used in experiments are properly anaesthetised and well treated. But the evidence shows that approximately three quarters of all animal experiments are conducted without any anaesthetic at all. Statistics from the Home Office show that the number of animals being 'used' without anaesthetic is going up.
   Recent figures show that the number of baboons used without anaesthetic went up by 11% while the number of experiments done without anaesthetic on rabbits went up by 20% and the number done without anaesthetic on beagles went up by 15%. Even when anaesthetics are used the chances are high that the animal will still suffer enormously for many experimenters are neither qualified doctors nor are they qualified veterinary surgeons.
   There are around 20 thousand licensed animal experimenters in Britain. And around 20 Home Office Inspectors. This means that if every inspector visits a different scientist every day (never has a day off, never takes any holidays, never falls sick, never spends time doing paperwork or attending meetings and works weekends) then each scientist will be visited about once every three years. It is, perhaps, not surprising that in one recent twelve month period the number of infringements of the rules by animal experimenters went up by 111% while the number of visits paid by inspectors to laboratories went down by 8%.
   All the available evidence shows that animals which are being kept for laboratory use are treated appallingly while they are waiting to be 'used' and are treated even worse once they are taken into the laboratory where they will eventually die.
2. Animal experimenters frequently claim that animals do not suffer because they cannot feel pain and do not respond emotionally to stressful circumstances. This claim is pitifully inaccurate and is yet another sign showing the intellectual inadequacy of those who still use animals in laboratory experiments.
   The prerequisites for pain reception are a central nervous system, a system of peripheral pain receptors and a series of neural connections between the receptors and the central nervous system. All vertebrate animals possess these three essentials and can undoubtedly feel pain. Anyone who has ever seen a dog or a cat in pain will know this.
   Similarly, there can be little doubt that the animals used in laboratory experiments do suffer a great deal of emotional and psychological distress.
   During recent years a good deal of research has been done which shows just how complex and sophisticated the social behaviour of animals can be. All animals suffer from fear, anxiety, boredom and frustration.
3. Although they do not usually have any medical qualifications the people who do animal experiments frequently claim that the results they obtain can be used to help patients.
   Indeed, they often go further and argue that their work has saved human lives.
   It is, they say, a question of priorities. 'Which do you want to put first?,' they will ask. 'Children or cats?'
   Let me put the record straight: Animal experiments do NOT help patients.
   On the contrary animal experiments kill patients by enabling scientists to produce misleading results. The only people who are helped by animal experiments are the people who perform them. They acquire money and status.
   Physicians and surgeons throughout the world now agree that the results obtained through animal experiments cannot be applied to human patients.
   'No one would test a drug intended for children on old people,' an eminent Swiss clinician told me. 'But we happily allow researchers to do experiments on animals which are totally different in both anatomical and physiological terms to people. It is hardly surprising that the results they obtain are worse than useless.'
   'The whole system of testing drugs on animal is crazy!' said a German physician. 'How can you possibly hope to test a drug for high blood pressure on animals which never suffer from high blood pressure?'
   Or, as another doctor I spoke to put it: 'No one would test a drug for pre-menstrual problems on small boys and yet that would make far more sense than testing such a drug on male rats.'

Even the smallest anatomical or physiological difference can render the results of animal studies quite useless. Worse, when taken seriously, they can produce dangerously misleading results. Testing drugs on mice before giving them to children is a total nonsense. Would you allow a surgeon who had only ever practiced on mice to take out your child's inflamed appendix? Would you fly in an aeroplane serviced by a man who had only ever practiced on bicycles? Would it be logical to test a college examination paper out on rabbits?

Relying on animal tests means that new products which are thought to be safe are mass marketed far too quickly.

The real irony is that although experiments on animals are frequently used by drug companies when they want to launch new products and are desperate for information which seems to suggest that their products are safe, the same experiments are dismissed as irrelevant when they produce results which might halt or slow down the commercial exploitation of a new drug.

Dr Vernon Coleman.

Another team of "scientists" submits to fatal scaldings 15,000 animals of various species, then administers to half of them a liver extract which is already known to be useful in cases of shock: As expected, the treated animals agonise longer than the others.

Beagles, well known for their mild and affectionate natures, are tortured until they start attacking each other. The "scientists" responsible for this announce that they were "conducting a study on juvenile delinquency."

Exceptions? Borderline cases? I wish they were.

Every day of the year, at the hands of white-robed individuals recognised as medical authorities, or bent on getting such recognition, or a degree, or at least a lucrative job, millions of animals - mainly mice, rats, guinea-pigs, hamsters, dogs, cats, rabbits, monkeys, pigs, turtles; but also horses, donkeys, goats, birds and fish - are slowly blinded by acids, submitted to repeated shocks or intermittent submersion, poisoned, inoculated with deadly diseases, disembowelled, frozen to be revived, starved, or left to die of thirst, in many cases after various glands have been entirely or partially extirpated or the spinal cord has been cut.

The victim's reactions are then meticulously recorded, except during the long weekends, when the animals are left unattended to meditate about their sufferings; which may last weeks, months, years, before death puts an end to their ordeal - death being the only effective anaesthesia most of the victims get to know.

It is this outrageous state of affairs which once caused Dr. James D. Gallagher, Director of Research of Lederle Laboratories, to declare:

Another basic problem which we share as the result of the regulations and things that prompted them is an unscientific preoccupation with animal studies. Animal studies are done for legal reasons and not for scientific reasons. The predictive value for such studies for man is meaningless - which means our research may be meaningless.

(Journal of the American Medical Association, March 14, 1964)

In fact, the so-called "medical experts" that have imposed animal tests as the touchstone of medical research are among the participants in the greatest fraud that has ever been perpetrated, mainly for profit motives, to the detriment of mankind in all history. To bring exhaustive proof of this assertion, with its growing number of medical people in full agreement, is the purpose of this expose.

Anybody who has ever taken care of a pet or any other animal has learned, either through personal experience or from a veterinarian, that one should never administer a human medicine to animals, for they may die from it. What does this mean? Obviously, that an animal organism reacts differently from a human organism, and that a medicine that benefits the one could harm the other.

But even people who are fully aware of this basic fact have been conned, through press agentry and the venality of the mass media, into accepting animal tests as a sure-fire safeguard, and will declare unthinkingly, regardless of the available evidence: "Since new medicines have to be tested, I prefer that they be tested on animals rather than on me."

This seemingly humanitarian ointment has two gigantic flies: First, that we constantly need new medicines; secondly, that animal tests give satisfactory information.

These are fallacies, which have been imposed, like religious dogmas that may not be disputed, upon the majority of people through systematic brainwashing. It begins for most of us long before the age of reason: First, in the likewise thoroughly conditioned family, in primary school next; through higher education, and the media afterwards.

"Everything that is obtained with animals is perfectly conclusive for man. Experiments made on animals with noxious substances or in detrimental conditions are perfectly conclusive for the toxicology and hygiene of man. The research on medical or toxic substances is also entirely applicable to man from a therapeutic point of view."

It was Claude Bernard, the apostle of today's veterinary-based medical research, who made these and similarly silly statements in his most famous work, Introduction to Experimental Medicine, which in 1865 laid the groundstone for today's medical researchers - all the growing, grievous proof of its erroneousness notwithstanding.

In fact, there is no such thing today as 'Science' in medicine - if we give to the word its original meaning of "Knowledge", instead of "Research", which is the meaning it has acquired in the United States today. Current Medical Science is nothing but a false dogma, imposed almost universally, by no matter what means, legitimate or not, by a smoothly organised coterie that in all industrialised nations form the Medical Power, in close alliance with the Chemical Syndicate. Their purpose is not the people's health, which is just being used as a pretext to extort large sums of money, but the aggrandisement of their own wealth and might.

True science presupposes free information, and exchange of different points of views. In the medical field this does not exist today. Too many honest and courageous doctors who have tried to voice opinions in contract with the "accepted" doctrines imparted by the Faculties - for instance, by warning people of the cancer racket or the effects of certain mass vaccinations imposed from above in the interest of the lucrative, job-providing industries - have all been quickly discouraged from continuing or silenced, have been regularly excluded from the news-making medical conventions (that's why all candidates must submit months beforehand the texts of the lectures they intend to deliver), and have been relegated to the bottom rung of the professional ladder, from where they can't express successfully any opinion-making view; or they have been expelled outright from the medical community. We shall examine other forms of censorship later.

And it is because of such systematic censorship, running parallel with a constant flow of bombastic medical propaganda, that occasional outbursts of candour, like the preceding statement by Dr. Gallagher, and the following one by Dr. Modell, have quickly fallen into the trough of oblivion, never again to be resurrected by their chastened authors.

205,000 PREPARATIONS

Already over 20 years ago, Dr. Walter Modell of Cornell University's Medical College, whom Time had described as "one of America's foremost drug experts," wrote in Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics:

When will they realise that there are too many drugs? No fewer than 15,000 new mixtures and dosages hit the market each year, while about 12,000 die off ... We simply don't have enough diseases to go around. At the moment the most helpful contribution is the new drug to counteract the untoward effects of other new drugs.

(Time, May 26, 1961)

Since 1961, the total number of medical preparations marketed world-wide has risen to some 205,000 and the new maladies have increased in the same proportion.

According to the Food and Drug Administration, 1.5 million Americans had to be hospitalised in 1978 as a consequence of taking drugs (which were supposed to "cure" them of something or other). And some 30% of all hospitalised people get further damaged by the therapy which is imposed on them. The number of people killed in the USA by the intake of drugs has been estimated at some 140,000 each year.

In fact, today the medical care industry is the second biggest business in North America, exceeded only by food production and distribution.

The situation is very similar in all industrialised countries whose citizens are amply "protected" by a Health Insurance system that encourages the use of drugs and expensive therapies, and extracts, from the gullible lower citizens, billions in tax money that flow directly into the coffers of the Chemo-Medical Syndicate.

LET THE DOCTORS STRIKE

So it is hardly a coincidence that during a 29 day physicians' strike in Israel in 1973, the national death rate was the lowest ever. According to statistics released by the Jerusalem Burial Society, The number of funerals dropped by nearly 50% on that occasion.

The same thing happened in 1976 in Columbia, when November marked the end of a 52 day strike by doctors in Bogota, the nation's capital. The National Catholic Reporter pointed out that during those eight weeks the death rate in Bogota went down 35%. The National Morticians Association of Columbia confirmed the fact.

The identical phenomenon came to pass a few years ago in California, and in 1978 in Great Britain.

MAN AND ANIMALS

Two grams of scopolamine kill a human being, but dogs and cats can stand hundred times higher dosages. A single Aminata phalloides mushroom can wipe out a whole human family, but is health food for the rabbit, one of the favourite laboratory animals. A porcupine can eat in one lump without discomfort as much opium as a human addict smokes in two weeks, and wash it down with as much prussic acid to poison a regiment of soldiers. The sheep can swallow enormous quantities of arsenic, once the murderer's favourite poison. Morphine, which calms and anaesthetises man, causes maniacal excitement in cats and mice. On the other hand our sweet almond can kill foxes, our common parsley is poisonous to parrots, and our revered penicillin strikes another favourite laboratory animal dead - the guinea pig.

The list can be lengthened at will, but these few instances should suffice to show them there couldn't be a more unreliable test for new drugs (that aren't needed in the first place) than animal experimentation.(see table overleaf)

The so-called Health authorities and researchers are fully aware of this fact, but they continue serving the warmed-over dish to the media and the public: Do you want us to test new drugs on your children? In fact, all synthetic products are harmful and all new drugs are being tested on you and your children all the time, because the animal tests which - it bears repetition - have just an alibi function, could give no answer, or, worse, have given misleading answers as to their effect on human beings. This rule knows no exception.

In fact, the therapeutic disasters, steadily on the increase today, did not exist before the imposition of the safety tests done on animals. They are a direct result of widespread animal experimentation.

THE POISON PUSHERS

Without a large number of always new synthetic medicines with mysterious or magic sounding names to fall back on, most of today's physicians would not know how to ply their trade. And yet at medical school they only get a limited instruction in pharmacology, because the teachers themselves can't keep up with the steady flow of new products that invade the market to replace those that must be withdrawn when it is no longer possible to conceal their uselessness or harmfulness.

The young doctors start learning their profession only when they leave medical school , and direct contact with patients starts. At the same time begins their real pharmacological education, which will accompany them through their career. The education is conducted by the flood of brochures from the drug manufacturers, and their travelling salesmen, who pay them personal calls at regular intervals, bearing gifts like gold fountain pens or invitations to duck-shoots - besides satchels full of samples of "new" drugs which they advise to try out on the patients and then to report (against remuneration) their findings. This shows clearly that the laboratory experiments have taught them nothing.

In other words, the budding doctor does not receive his medical education from his teachers at medical school, whose knowledge has gotten stuck several years earlier, but by high-pressure salesmen of industrial complexes, whose purpose is not the people's health (a healthy population means a dead pharmaceutical industry) but ever growing profits.

CONSEQUENCES

Due to a "safe" painkiller, Paracetamol, 1,500 people had to be hospitalised in Great Britain in 1971; as usual, a good number of them were further damaged by the therapy imposed upon them while in hospital.

At about the same time, in the United States, Orabilex caused kidney damage with fatal outcomes, MEL/29 caused cataracts, Methaqualone caused severe psychic disturbances leading to at least 366 deaths, mainly through murder or suicide.

Germany's Thalidomide, which caused at least 10,000 malformed children, was merely the firs of a quickly growing list of "teratogenic" (malformation causing) drugs, that have dramatically increased the number of birth defects ever since the compulsory animal tests as an alleged safeguard against that kind of mishap have been imposed.

In 1972 the aerosol spray, Isoproterenol, packaged in great Britain, was found by Dr. Paul D. Stolley of Johns Hopkins Hospital as being responsible for the mysterious epidemic that had killed world-wide as many as 3,500 asthma sufferers in the Sixties.

Stilboestrol caused cancer in young women. In the fall of 1975, Italy's health authorities seized the anti-allergic Trilergan, which had caused the very viral hepatitis that the researchers had been promising to eliminate once and for all many years ago, but which has been spreading steadily since then.

In early 1976 the Salvoxyl-Wander laboratories of Switzerland's Sandoz complex withdrew their Flamanil, advertised to fight rheumatism, but had turned out to cause loss of consciousness.

A few months later, Great Britain's gigantic ICI (Imperial Chemical Industries) announced that it had started paying compensation to the victims (or their survivors) of its cardiotonic Eraldin, and resorted to the usual alibi that the drug had been introduced to the market only after 7 years of "very intensive laboratory tests" - meaning on animals, which had given the poisonous medication a clean bill of health. By then, countless consumers had suffered severe damages to the eyes and digestive tracts, and many had died.

In the summer of 1977, The Swiss multi-national, Ciba-Geigy had to withdraw from the American market its Phenformin, which had been palmed off on diabetics for 18 years: it was no longer possible to conceal that its collateral effects had caused about 1,000 deaths annually. Nevertheless, after this had been announced in the press, the Health Authorities in the German Federal Republic gave its own drug manufacturers a helping hand and a whole year's time- until July 1, 1978 - to sell off its stock of lethal anti-diabetic drugs, including Dipar, Silubin-retard and Sindatil. Clearly, what mattered was not the public's health, but the Syndicate's profits.

On September 11, 1979, a panel of doctors and former Valium addicts told a US Senate Subcommittee on Health that Valium, a tranquilliser taken routinely by more than 15% of the adult population, was potentially addictive even in moderate doses. The former users said they experienced agonising withdrawal symptoms when they tried to drop the drug, and they complained that their doctors never informed them of the drug's potential addictive qualities when first prescribing it.

THE LEGALISED MASSACRE (CONTINUED)

• Preludin and Maxiton, "pep pills" also used to reduce appetite, were withdrawn from the market after causing serious damages to the heart and the nervous system.
• Barbiturates (Nembutal etc.), prescribed against insomnia, turn out in the long run to increase insomnia instead of curing it.
• Pronap and Plaxin, two tranquilliser, have killed many babies in South Africa and were withdrawn in 1970.
• Phenacetin, only recently taken off the market in the United States, is a painkiller sold in various compositions under 200 different brand labels. It can block the kidney functions, destroy the kidneys, cause kidney tumours and destroy the red blood corpuscles.
• Amydopyrine, another painkiller, has caused lethal damage to the blood, including agranulocytosis, and has been withdrawn in many countries, but not in all. It occurs in Salgydal, in association with Phenacetin, in Optalidon and in over 160 other products.
• Marzine, used against nausea and travel sickness, has been withdrawn in 1971 in many countries (e.g. Switzerland and Italy) because of the grave damage it inflicts, especially in children.
• Reserpine, prescribed to reduce blood pressure, has been shown to increase threefold the risk of breast cancer in women. It is also considered to increase the risk of cancer of the brain, the pancreas, the uterus, the ovaries and the skin. It is furthermore famous for causing nightmares and depression.
• Cyclophosphamide, another drug advertised to fight cancer, provokes widespread necroses which start in the liver and the lungs and usually kill the patient much sooner than the cancer would, as do most drugs employed to "check" cancer by chemotherapy. "A Miracle Drug That Backfired" was the title of an International Herald Tribune article on January 14, 1981. It began by recalling that American physicians had started prescribing Clofibrate massively 13 years before because:

  The drug seemed to offer modern man the luxury of having his cake and eating it too - that is, of continuing to devour steak and butter without fear of heart attack just by taking a little capsule four times a day ... Far from saving lives, it now appears that Clofibrate actually increases the death rate among its users. A decade long study run by the World Health Organisation (WHO) recently reported that men taking the drug were 25% more likely to die of a broad range of disorders, including cancer, stroke, respiratory disease and ironically, heart attack, than those who got a placebo capsule.

But don't get depressed folks. Thousands of other confused or just grant-hungry scientists are currently busy using up millions of fresh animals trying to find new products capable of neutralising the disastrous side-effects of Clofibrate and other miracle drugs.

NEW MALADIES

The Oxychinol Case

The systematic fraud perpetrated by the all-powerful Chemical Syndicate in collusion with the various Health Institutes to the detriment of the world population's health is growing day by day. And yet proof comes to light day after day that the "new drugs" (in actual fact they are mostly the same old drugs with identical ingredients in varying combinations and under different labels) are not only incapable of curing diseases that nature couldn't cure by herself given half a chance, but are constantly producing brand new diseases, unknown a few years ago.

In August 1978 came the news from Japan that a Tokyo court had found three drug manufacturers and the Japanese government guilty of selling drugs containing Oxychinol (also called Clioquinol), responsible for a new, severe disease of the nervous system - subacute myeloptic neuropathy, or SMON for short. The manufacturers - Takeda, Ciba-Geigy Japan and Tanabe Seijaku - were sentenced along with the Japanese health authorities to pay indemnities of 3.25 billion Yen (approx.. $17 million or £5 million) to 133 plaintiffs. This was the conclusion of but the first of over 20 court cases currently under way.

The plaintiffs had demonstrated that SMON was caused by drugs that had been sold under the protest that they would miraculously cure what the manufacturers had defined as "summer diarrhoea", a highly unscientific definition for a mild intestinal disorder that affects a great number of travellers in tropical lands; Americans usually call it the "GI's" or "Montezuma's revenge", and the British "Spanish tummy", and it usually clears up without treatment within 48 hours.

That is, unless one takes the "miracle" drug Oxychinol that Ciba-Geigy had developed several years earlier, and marketed world-wide under different labels (Mexaform, Enterovioform, Intestopan, Sterosan etc.), recommending them to travellers at the first sign of indigestion, and even prophylactically, i.e. before developing any intestinal troubles (which this drug causes!).

At least a thousand deaths had to be counted in Japan and 30,000 cases of blindness and/or paralysis of the lower limbs before it was realised that heretofore unexplained similar cases of death, blindness and paralysis in Holland, Denmark, Germany, France, Great Britain, Belgium, Italy, Sweden etc had also been caused by the Oxychinol-containing drugs.

These findings exploded Ciba-Geigy's lame alibi that only Japanese had been adversely affected by this drug and that therefore the Japanese were themselves to blame for their national catastrophe, having fallen for the manufacturer"s claims with exaggerated confidence!

In 1979, a Swedish medical doctor Olle Hansson, Professor of paediatric neurology at Goteborg University, published in a book the findings of the Tokyo court, which had summoned him to testify at the first Oxychinol trial. In this book he leaves no doubts about the fact that some big drug manufacturers do not hesitate to walk over corpses - human corpses - for the sake of profits, and resort to any and every kind of lie to conceal the fact that pecuniary gain is their ruling motivation.

In Japan alone, Oxychinol was sold under 168 different brand names.

The many shocking findings of Dr. Olle Hansson's study include the disclosure of Ciba-Geigy's own research protocols, dated as far back as June 19, 1939, showing that the Swiss researchers managed to poison a goodly number of animals, who were seized by violent convulsions and respiratory difficulties as soon as they were made to swallow Oxychinol, and most of them finally met with a painful death.

In spite of these results, which were kept secret, Ciba-Geigy proceeded to market its dangerous drug world-wide, limiting itself to publishing a warning in its accompanying leaflets to the effect that the drug should not be administered to house pets.

What does this prove? Clearly, that the researchers themselves do not believe in the validity of animal tests in respect to human beings.

The DES Case

Slaughter of the Innocent related in some detail the Stilboestrol case. The full scientific name for the drug is Diethylstilboestrol, but is commonly known as DES in the United States. The prototype of all synthetic oestrogens (female sex hormones), it was developed in 1939, tested without adverse effects on animals for years, but then it was suddenly found to have caused cancer in girls whose mothers had been prescribed this "miracle drug" by their doctors during pregnancy, as DES passes through the placental barrier and can trigger a cancer in the foetus.

But why had this drug been administered to pregnant women in the first place? Doesn't every drug taken during pregnancy hold a danger? Clearly, not to the knowledge of the "researchers" raised in the false belief that what they see in animals applies to man as well. And in fact they had prescribed DES to their patients for the very reason that they were pregnant: the drug was touted to insure a safe pregnancy.

After DES had turned out to be the first drug that the medical confraternity itself had recognised as being responsible for creating a new type of cancer in human beings, animal tests with DES were started over again, and again with no results: the test animals did not develop cancer.

Dr. Robert W. Miller of the National Cancer Institute of Bethesda, Md., Who in 1973 wrote the official warning hastily published by Geneva's WHO, revealed in that paper:

Experimental animal studies: There was no correlation between the types of tumours obtained in experimental models (i.e. laboratory animal - H.R.) and types of childhood cancer.

Dr. Miller either lacked the wisdom to draw the conclusion that animal experimentation had to be discarded as tragically misleading after that, or he lacked the courage to acknowledge it, which is more likely, for he and thousands of Bethesda co-workers live from animal experiments, since they don't know of any other way of doing research or, perhaps, of earning a living. In fact, all Dr. Miller had to offer in his paper was to recommend an intensification of such experiments, even thought the cases he had reported had developed after a latency period of 14 to 22 years.

The N.Y. Times of July 17, 1979 had an article titled "Woman Wins Suit in DES Case" which began:

In a groundbreaking verdict rendered yesterday in the State Supreme Court in the Bronx, a jury decided that a pharmaceutical company must pay $500,000 in damages to a woman for cancer caused by DES, a drug given to her mother to prevent miscarriages...

The plaintiff was identified as Joyce Bichler, a 25 year old social worker, and the manufacturer sentenced to pay up was Ely Lilly & Co..

On August 26, 1979, another article in the N.Y. Times was titled "A Woman Who Said DES Caused a Cancer Is Awarded $800,000." The woman: 26 year old Anne Needham. The manufacturer liable for the damage, White Laboratories of Kennilworth, J.J., was meanwhile taken over by Schering-Plough Corporation. The article concluded:

During the trial, Mr. Charfoos (the plaintiffs attorney - H.R.), said some 400 women had developed vaginal cancer because their mother took the drug and that at least 1,000 other female offspring were in pre-cancerous condition.

While cancer marches on in all the countries whose obtuse, herd populations allow themselves to be dominated by the Medical Power and the chemical industry, one question still begs for an answer: Why are the drug manufacturers still being tried by civil courts and not, as should certainly be the case, by criminal courts under the indictment of mass murder? The explanation is in the following parts.

Time Magazine had another DES daughters article in its March 24, 1980 issue, which read in part:

Now there is more unsettling news for DES daughters. When they reach child-bearing age, they appear to be more vulnerable to miscarriage - as well as to stillbirth, premature birth and ectopic pregnancy (in which the foetus grows outside the uterus).

The New England Journal of Medicine and other medical publications gave more news and all of it was bad. Damage from DES can extend to the third generation, and also affect the genital organs of the male offspring.

PS: DES is still on the market as a "morning after" pill. Ironically, the exact opposite of its original intents.

MALFORMATIONS MULTIPLYING

In the chapter "Ten Thousand Little Monsters", Slaughter of the Innocent brought full, indisputable and undisputed evidence that animal experimentation not only caused the world-wide Thalidomide tragedy, but was directly responsible for the magnitude of that tragedy.

In its February 23, 1962 issue, when the first warning signs were appearing on the world horizon, Time Magazine reported that Thalidomide had been marketed "after three years of animal tests."

On August 1, 1958, the German manufacturers, Chemie Grunenthal, had sent a letter to 40,000 German doctors describing his Contergan (Thalidomide) as the best tranquilliser for pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers, as it damaged neither mother nor child.

In October 1961, the British licensee, Distillers Company, after extensive animal tats of its own, had launched Thalidomide on the United Kingdom market, under the name Distaval, with the following assurance:

"Distaval can be given with complete safety to pregnant women and nursing mothers without adverse effect on mother or child."

In December 1970, the longest criminal trial in Germany's judicial history ended with the acquittal of Chemie Grunenthal: a long line of international medical authorities had testified that animal tests could never be conclusive for human beings, thus relieving Grunenthal of any responsibility for the tragedy: the required tests had been conscientiously undertaken.

When the vivisectionists fail once more, do they blush, pack up their easy-learner kits and sink off into the night? Of course not. They just clamour for more money to repair the damage they have just done.

The Thalidomide case should have ruled out further animal tests once and for all. Against all logic, with nothing but profit motive in mind and in complete disregard of the consumer's safety, the animal tests were multiplied - with easily predictable, catastrophic results.

DRUG DAMAGE NOT PREDICTED BY ANIMAL TESTS

• Eraldin (for heart disease) - Corneal damage including blindness.
• Chloramphenicol (antibiotic) - Aplastic anaemia, often fatal.
• Ibufenac (for arthritis) - Deaths from liver damage.
• Flosint (for arthritis) - Several deaths.
• Zipeprof (cough suppressant) - Severe neurological symptoms at high doses - seizures and coma.

Click for books by Hans Ruesch