Flu Questions

August 20, 2009Jenny Marie Hatch Leave a comment

Flu Natural Remedies
How far will feds go to inject you with swine-flu shot?
CDC spends $16 million on ‘outreach’ to convince Americans to get vaccine
From World Net Daily:
Concerns about possible side effects

“However, in a study conducted at the University of Hong Kong, the British Medical Journal reported that less than half of 8,500 doctors and nurses in public hospitals will accept vaccination against the swine flu – even following increases in the World Health Organization’s pandemic alert level.

The study revealed, “The major barriers identified were fear of side effects and doubts about efficacy.”

Nonetheless, federal authorities are preparing to launch a nationwide campaign to convince Americans to get the swine flu vaccine, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. Government officials have expressed concern that public demand for immunization will not be high enough.

“Many parents (in focus groups) expressed a lot of concerns about 2009 H1N1 vaccine. Those concerns were centered around the fact that it was new and it was being developed quickly,” said Kris Sheedy, a communications director with the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. “There were comments such as ‘this is new and I don’t want my child to be a guinea pig.'”

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the government will spend “about $16 million on outreach to convince people of the need to get the swine flu vaccine.”

As WND reported, alarmist language over possible outbreaks of swine flu as well as a series of moves by the federal government are fueling fears federal agents will soon be forcing citizens to be vaccinated – prompting the Constitution Party to launch a pre-emptive defense against any such effort.

The Constitution Party, a fast-growing alternative to the dominant Democratic and Republican parties in many elections, has come out strongly in opposition to any “mandatory injections” of “potential toxic (H1N1) ‘swine flu’ vaccine.”

Condemnation also has come from Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, who cited the swine flu vaccination program in 1976. The effort killed more than two dozen people – not from the flu but from the vaccine.

Paul said he was concerned that “nearly $8 billion will be spent to address a ‘potential pandemic flu’ which could result in mandatory vaccinations for no discernable reason other than to enrich the pharmaceutical companies that make the vaccine.”

Mike Adams Rap Don’t Inject Me
Swine flu jab link to killer nerve disease: Leaked letter reveals concern of neurologists over 25 deaths in America
“A warning that the new swine flu jab is linked to a deadly nerve disease has been sent by the Government to senior neurologists in a confidential letter.

The letter from the Health Protection Agency, the official body that oversees public health, has been leaked to The Mail on Sunday, leading to demands to know why the information has not been given to the public before the vaccination of millions of people, including children, begins.

It tells the neurologists that they must be alert for an increase in a brain disorder called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), which could be triggered by the vaccine.
GBS attacks the lining of the nerves, causing paralysis and inability to breathe, and can be fatal.

The letter, sent to about 600 neurologists on July 29, is the first sign that there is concern at the highest levels that the vaccine itself could cause serious complications.

It refers to the use of a similar swine flu vaccine in the United States in 1976 when:
More people died from the vaccination than from swine flu.
500 cases of GBS were detected.
The vaccine may have increased the risk of contracting GBS by eight times.
The vaccine was withdrawn after just ten weeks when the link with GBS became clear.

The US Government was forced to pay out millions of dollars to those affected.
Concerns have already been raised that the new vaccine has not been sufficiently tested and that the effects, especially on children, are unknown.
It is being developed by pharmaceutical companies and will be given to about 13 million people during the first wave of immunisation, expected to start in October.
Top priority will be given to everyone aged six months to 65 with an underlying health problem, pregnant women and health professionals.

The British Neurological Surveillance Unit (BNSU), part of the British Association of Neurologists, has been asked to monitor closely any cases of GBS as the vaccine is rolled out.
One senior neurologist said last night: ‘I would not have the swine flu jab because of the GBS risk.’

And from another recent article located at Spiegel Online:
Germany
The Injection Business
How Safe Is the Swine Flu Vaccine?
By SPIEGEL Staff
Swine flu symptoms may generally be mild but in a bid to prevent a pandemic health officials and pharmaceutical companies are planning to administer a new, little-tested vaccine to millions of Germans. Meanwhile, officials in the United States are taking a more cautious approach to fighting the virus.
“…Does It Pose a Health Risk?

But the question is: Is it even advisable to get the supposedly protective vaccination as quickly as possible? Is the swine flu vaccine truly safe? Or does it pose a health risk?

To avoid being accused of doing nothing, government health officials are preparing a vaccination campaign unprecedented in scope. Last Friday, the health ministers of Germany’s states ordered 50 million doses of the vaccine from pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).

But their plans do not call for the standard, tried-and-tested program of vaccinations that are administered to millions of Germans each year to combat the seasonal influenza virus. Instead, new types of vaccine production processes will be used, as well as new drugs designed to boost the immune system.

In addition, the vaccine serums have passed through a uniquely accelerated approval process at the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) in London. “What we are experiencing here is a large-scale experiment being conducted on the German population,” warns Wolfgang Becker-Brüser, the publisher of arznei telegram, a professional journal critical of the pharmaceutical industry.

When the plans for an accelerated mass vaccination were developed, this approach seemed justified. In 2004, a new type of killer bird flu virus known as H5N1 made headlines when it became known that the resulting illness was fatal in 60 percent of those infected. Fortunately, the virus has not (yet) proven to be highly contagious from human to human. But if the bird flu virus ever mutates, a pathogen could develop that will spread quickly and be extremely deadly. If that happens, accelerated vaccination will undoubtedly be preferable to no vaccination, all risks aside.

But the swine flu virus, or H1N1, has not proven to be a killer on anything like the same scale. Although more than 1,100 people had died from swine flu by last Friday, according to official figures, most of the victims were people with underlying conditions, in some cases severe. Pregnant women also appear to be among those at particularly high risk. In the vast majority of cases, however, the symptoms of the swine flu have been noticeably mild.”

…The Americans have good reason to be cautious. Their health officials still have uneasy memories of what the New York Times called the “swine flu fiasco” of 1976, when 13 soldiers at a military base contracted a new H1N1 virus and one of them died. Because of fears that the world could face a new flu pandemic almost as deadly as the 1918-1919 “Spanish flu,” more than 40 million people were immunized with a hurriedly produced vaccine.

The pandemic never materialized, but instead there were many reports of presumed vaccine complications. One that was particularly insidious was Guillain-Barré syndrome, a neurological disorder that causes paralysis in the legs and can lead to severe pulmonary complications.

That experience prompted the FDA to establish stricter standards for the approval of new vaccines, requiring manufacturers to conduct costly studies with thousands of volunteers. Given these regulations, it is only too convenient for drug companies when new vaccines and production processes to combat swine flu are tested on millions of Europeans. Indeed, instead of having to pay for testing, the drug companies stand to profit handsomely from this approach.

It is already clear that GlaxoSmithKline will be the greatest beneficiary of the swine flu. According to information obtained by SPIEGEL, one dose of vaccine will cost €8.33 ($11.9), and GSK stands to earn revenues upwards of €410 million ($588 million) in Germany alone.

Costs Could Reach €1 Billion

And then there is the cost of administering the vaccine on such a large scale, which will not be borne by the health ministers who have ordered the vaccine from the pharmaceutical companies, but by Germany’s health insurance agencies. This, at any rate, is the way German Minister of Health Ulla Schmidt, a Social Democrat, wants the cost issue to be handled. The “summary minutes” of a teleconference of state health ministers also call for the insurance companies to carry the full cost of vaccine administration.

The least expensive option, at least in cities, would be for public health agencies to implement the vaccination program. In that case, the authorities anticipate a markup of approximately €10 per person. It would cost an estimated two or three times as much if doctors in private practice administered the vaccinations and purchased the vaccine from pharmacies.

In the end, each of the German states will define its own procedure. Depending on how the vaccine is administered to the population, the program will cost the health insurance agencies between €650 million and upwards of a €1 billion for the amount of vaccine currently on order.

But things could actually turn out somewhat differently. Health insurance agencies will only pay for vaccines that are in fact administered, while the states will end up paying for unused doses. And perhaps the anticipated surge in demand for vaccinations will never materialize. “Imagine if we have a pandemic, and no one gets vaccinated,” says a ministry official from one of the eastern German states.”

MICHAEL FRÖHLINGSDORF, MARKUS GRILL, VERONIKA HACKENBROCH, GERALD TRAUFETTER
Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan
I’m not getting vaccinated, and neither are my children…

Jenny Hatch with Baby Allison in 1992
Email
Click on the image to get to the Natural Family BLOG

ABC News: Mothers to be saying NO to modern medicine

December 12, 2008Jenny Marie Hatch Leave a comment

Go here to read this story:
Small but Growing Number of Women Choose to Give Birth at Home
By DONNA HUNTER and SARAH NETTER

Modern medicine means not having to go through childbirth alone. But that’s what a small and growing number of women are choosing to do.

Back in the 1800s, giving birth at home, sometimes with the assistance of a midwife, was about the only option. But doing the same today generates both well-wishers and critics.

Watch the story Friday, Jan. 2 on “20/20” at 10 p.m. ET

“The majority of babies throughout history have been born unassisted, and I felt this is what birth is supposed to be,” said Laura Shanley, who has had five babies at home that she chronicles in her book,”Unassisted Childbirth.”

“When you’re told that this is …[a] dangerous process and everyone around you is alert and expecting the worst, it’s really Murphy’s Law,” she said.

Does Home Birth Make Sense?

The American Medical Association isn’t taking any chances. To guard against accidents, and maybe to slow the trickle of rising home births, the AMA issued a resolution in June, saying that “the safest setting for labor and delivery is a hospital.”

That’s both obvious and sound advice according to Dr. Helaine Landy, a professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, D.C.

“Having a baby in and of itself, can be a very dangerous situation, whether you deliver at home or in the hospital,” she said. “But delivering at home, where one does not have all the ancillary support to be able to save the woman or save the baby, in my mind, just doesn’t make a lot of sense.”

For actress and former talk show host Ricki Lake, having a baby at home made perfect sense. Lake had her first child in a hospital but decided to have her second child at home with the aid of a midwife, filmed for her documentary “The Business of Being Born.”

“I’m not anti-hospital, but more can go wrong in a hospital setting. You’re on an assembly line, you’re given one drug which leads to another drug, which leads to another drug,” Lake said.

Although many women look forward to receiving drugs to subdue discomfort during labor, Lake said the pain of childbirth quickly slips from memory.

“It’s very typical for any woman who’s having a drug-free birth to say, you know, to hit a wall and to … scream obscenities, but you forget the second you see that baby, you totally forget about the pain,” she said.

Natural Childbirth at Home

Supporters of home birth say the experience of bearing a child is enhanced when kept intensely personal and completely natural.

“I felt like I’d touched the eternal, when you look back at your baby and your hands are the first to touch her,” Shanley said. “I mean, this experience will carry me through the rest of my life.”

Choosing home birth could be considered the polar opposite of choosing the increasingly common and popular C-section. It’s how one in three American women have given birth. In some circles, the procedure has been called “too posh to push.”

“It’s major abdominal surgery,” Lake said. “I mean, some women are justifying, you know, ‘Oh, because I want to avoid the pain of labor.’ They want to have C-sections, and I can see the appeal on a certain level, because women are working — we’re busy, we are trying to fit everything into our lives.”

When Something Goes Wrong

Many modern women who plan an unassisted birth choose an available hospital as a backup plan. But home births don’t always have happy endings.

Some woman who choose not to take advantage of the latest medical interventions say they have been socially tainted when something goes wrong with a home birth.

After three successful unassisted births and before the fourth, Shanley had a son with a rare heart problem who died just hours after being born at home.

“If you have a baby that’s born at home, and especially in an unassisted birth, regardless of the fact that the coroner said, ‘This baby would not have survived,’ you know, there are still people that will blame me for my baby’s death,” Shanley said. “And that’s just something that I have to accept.”

Jenny Hatch

My Video Story: Unassisted Childbirth

Kamut Muffins

July 26, 2008Jenny Marie Hatch Leave a comment

This video is hosted on My Share Page at One True Media:
Go Here to view it
And the You Tube Version:

Recipe:
Raspberry Cinnamon Kamut Muffin Recipe:
4 C Freshly Gound Whole Organic Kamut Grain
1/4 C Freshly Ground Whole Golden and Brown Flax Seeds
2 C Brown Sugar
1 C White Sugar
2 tsp Sea Salt
1 1/2 tsp Baking Powder
1 1/2 tsp Baking Soda
6 Organic Eggs
1 C Whole Organic Milk
3/4 C Extra Virgin Olive Oil
Grease 24 Muffin Tins
Fill the tins 3/4 with muffin batter
Drop 2 raspberries and a dollop of organic butter on the muffins, then add 1 tsp of cinnamon sugar mix onto the raspberries. Cover with a little cap of dough and bake for thirty minutes in a 350 degree oven.
These yummy muffins are a crowd pleaser!

Kamut Mini Muffins

Jenny Hatch
The Natural Family BLOG
The Natural Family Company
“Healthy Families Make A Healthy World!”

American Medical Association declares WAR on Home Birth!

June 18, 2008Jenny Marie Hatch Leave a comment

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists on the subject of Home Deliveries

Make photo slide shows at www.OneTrueMedia.com

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists……A WALL of obstruction for mothers and families who desire to give birth holistically….
Huffington Post:
Docs to Women: Pay No Attention to Ricki Lake’s Home Birth
Ladies, the physicians of America have issued their decree: they don’t want you having your babies at home with midwives.
We can’t imagine why not. Study upon study have shown that planning a home birth with a trained midwife is a great choice if you want to avoid unnecessary medical intervention. Midwives are experts in supporting the physiological birth process: monitoring you and your baby during labor, helping you into positions that help labor progress, protecting your pelvic parts from damage while you push, and “catching” the baby from the position that’s most effective and comfortable for you — hands and knees, squatting, even standing — not the position most comfortable for her.
When healthy women are supported this way, 95% give birth vaginally, with hardly any intervention.
And yet, the American Medical Association doesn’t see the point. Yesterday at its annual meeting it adopted a policy written by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists against “home deliveries” and in support of legislation “that helps ensure safe deliveries and healthy babies by acknowledging that the safest setting for labor, delivery, and the immediate post-partum period is in the hospital” or accredited birth center.
“There ought to be a law!” cry the doctors.
The trouble is, they have no evidence to back up their safety claims. In fact, the largest and most rigorous study of home birth internationally to date found that among 5,000 healthy, “low-risk” women, babies were born just as safely at home under a midwife’s care as in the hospital. And not only that, the study, like many before it, found that the women actually fared better at home, with far fewer interventions like labor induction, cesarean section, and episiotomy (taking scissors to the vagina, a practice that according to the research should be obsolete but is still performed on one-third of women who give birth vaginally).
Which is why the American Public Health Association and the American College of Nurse Midwives support women choosing home birth. The British OB/GYNs have read the research, too, and have this to say: “There is no reason why home birth should not be offered to women at low risk of complications… it may confer considerable benefits for them and their families. There is ample evidence showing that labouring at home increases a woman’s likelihood of a birth that is both satisfying and safe…”
The other trouble with the American MDs is that they seem to have lost all respect for women’s civil rights, indeed for the U.S. Constitution — the right to privacy, to bodily integrity, and the right of every adult to determine her own health care. The “father knows best” legislation they are promoting could indeed be used to criminally prosecute women who choose home birth, say, by equating it with child abuse.
Research evidence be damned, the doctors want to mandate you to go to the hospital. They don’t want you to have a choice.
We think they’re spooked. The cesarean rate is rising, celebrities are publicizing their home births (the initial wording of the AMA resolution actually took aim at Ricki for publicizing her home birth on the Today Show!), people are reading Pushed and watching The Business of Being Born, and there’s a nationwide legislative “push” to license certified professional midwives in all states (The AMA is against that, too, by the way).
The docs are on the defensive.
After all, birth is big business — it’s in fact the most common reason for a woman to be admitted to the hospital. And if more women start giving birth outside of it, who will get paid? Not doctors and not hospitals.
“The AMA supports a woman’s right to make an informed decision regarding her delivery and to choose her health care provider,” the group said in a statement. But if it really supported women’s choices it wouldn’t adopt a policy condemning home birth and midwives.
Because if U.S. women are to have real birth choices, everybody needs to be working together to provide them, not waging turf wars at their expense.
Jenny Hatch

Continue reading “American Medical Association declares WAR on Home Birth!” →

NRO: Jonah Goldberg – Why Hillary Won’t Quit

May 17, 2008Jenny Marie Hatch Leave a comment

Go Here to read the piece
QUOTE:

She can’t win. The pundits say it. The polls say it. The math says it. It’s even the word on the street. If Huggy Bear from Starsky & Hutch were around, he’d say it’s time to stick a fork in her.