Tag: action

  • Day 2 “Health Freedom” Legislative Session

    #5MINUTEACTIVIST

    SEND 3 IMPORTANT EMAILS

    1. Email jvanderwoude@house.idaho.gov

    This is the Vice Chair of the Health and Welfare Committee. There have been several health freedom protecting bills that need to be heard in this committee. It is UP TO THE CHAIRMEN to decide if these important bills will be heard. Tell the Vice Chair to Reconvene the Health and Welfare Committee to Hear these important bills!

    Email #2 Tell All the SENATORS
    here’s a link to all the Senators email addresses

    YES on H 429 Mask Exemptions for School Children

    YES on H 419 No Disclosure about Vaccination Status

    NO on H 412 Exemptions

    Email #3 Email Committee and Pro Tem to get H 429 in Committee to be voted upon. PALodge@senate.idaho.gov, CWinder@senate.idaho.gov

    BILL EXPLAINATION

    H 429 Exemptions for Masking of School Children

    Those in red want your children to be masked without exemptions!! They want your children in a plexiglass cage and kicked out of school programs.

    Is that YOUR legislator? Is s/he representing YOUR family? What say you at voting time IDAHO⁉️

    Red Voted to Keep Your Children Masked WITHOUT Exemptions

    Rep Ron Ronald M Nate’s H429 Allowing Parents to OPT their children out of mask mandate

    Statement of Purpose: 

    “To protect the rights of children to attend public schools, to provide an exemption from mandates for mask-wearing, Plexiglas enclosures, or other medical interventions for medical, religious, or personal reasons, which cannot be denied. No person will create limitations on participation or activity in any school programs on the basis of such exemption.” 

    Email the Senate and ask them to vote YES on H429 to protect Idaho’s children.

    H 419 Amends Existing Law to Prohibit Employers from Requiring Proof of the Vaccine

    The house passed H419 which amends existing law to prohibit employers from requiring proof of the jab.

    Headed to the senate! The names in RED …They want employers empowered to require you to take a medical procedure against your will and violate your right to privacy If you don’t own your body what does that make you

    If you have privacy what does that make you

    You got it…a slave

    Email the Senate and ask them to vote YES on H419 to protect Idaho’s workers. #5MinActivism

    Tell the Senate NO on H 412 – 3(b)excludes protection from discrimination for our healthcare workers

    Tell the Senate NO on H415 Exemptions

    When an exemption is given – how easy it is to take it away!!

    Ok, who here is from CA and experienced the removal of vax exemptions for your children and o attend school?
    How many of you moved here to flee the state that you lived in but had turned against you when it came to your parental rights and health freedom?

    I remember watching your legislative session where your philosophical exemption was removed. I watched hours of testimony and cried with you. I watched you plead for your rights and saw your words fall on the deaf ears of a cold legislature. I saw how the shenanigans of changing up the committee after testimonies but before the vote changed the possible outcome of the vote. I learned that day that what the government giveth the government can take away. This was when I knew that my own children were in danger of losing the liberty I had enjoyed.

    My California friends have now lost religious exemptions for their children and doctors won’t give medical exemptions for fear of losing their licenses.

    If ID passes H415 ID workers will be headed for the same fate as the children of CA.

    Out of fear and desperation, we can not settle for this crumb bill (trading our rights for privileges) that the government will eventually take away.

    Email the Senate and tell them to VOTE NO on H421. Our legislators want to pass protection for you but this is not it.
    Idahoans deserve better!!

    CONTACTING YOUR SENATORS

    This is a quick copy and paste email list for our current legislators. This is for 2021. Copy each group and paste it into your 3 separate and identical emails. This allows you to send that entire Senate without getting your email bounced for spam.

    1. Compose your email.
    2. Make to more copies
    3. Copy the email groups into each email
    4. Send to your Idaho Senators
    5. **Call you Senator and leave a message and let them know you are a constitutent that this is how you want to be represented

    GROUP 1

    JAgenbroad@senate.idaho.gov, KAnthon@senate.idaho.gov, SBair@senate.idaho.gov, RBayer@senate.idaho.gov, GBurgoyne@senate.idaho.gov, VBurtenshaw@senate.idaho.gov, KCook@senate.idaho.gov,CCrabtree@senate.idaho.gov,LDenHartog@senate.idaho.gov,

    GROUP 2

    SGrow@senate.idaho.gov, JGuthrie@senate.idaho.gov, MHarris@senate.idaho.gov, LHeider@senate.idaho.gov, DJohnson@senate.idaho.gov,  TLakey@senate.idaho.gov, ALee@senate.idaho.gov, DLent@senate.idaho.gov, PALodge@senate.idaho.gov, FMartin@senate.idaho.gov, DNelson@senate.idaho.gov, MNye@senate.idaho.gov,

    GROUP 3

    JPatrick@senate.idaho.gov, ARabe@senate.idaho.gov, JRice@senate.idaho.gov, DRicks@senate.idaho.gov, Riggs@senate.idaho.gov, MSouza@senate.idaho.gov, MStennett@senate.idaho.gov, SThayn@senate.idaho.gov, SJVick@senate.idaho.gov, JWardEngelking@senate.idaho.gov, CWinder@senate.idaho.gov, MWintrow@senate.idaho.gov, JWoodward@senate.idaho.gov, CZito@senate.idaho.gov,

    Those from California won’t forget!

  • FDA Posed to Eliminate Access to almost 300 Natural Substances many used to treat Cancer & Chronic Illness

    TAKE ACTION! The fate of a large number of natural medicines is under review by the FDA. COMMENT TODAY TO PROTECT YOUR ACCESS TO NATURAL SUBSTANCES used for 100’s if not 1000’s of years. Comment Period Closes December 4.

    This upcoming decision to be made by the FDA this January could take away public access to natural substances that have been providing healing to a significant number of people, specifically those dealing with cancer and other chronic illnesses.
    UPDATED WITH VIDEO FROM DR. KARLFELDT & Miste Karlfeldt, Executive Director of HFI

    Dr. Michael Karlfeldt and Dr. Paul Anderson discuss what we can do to protect our access to things that are saving people’s lives. Dr. Anderson has been testifying and attending hearings at the FDA, where the fate of a large number of natural medicines have been under review for several years. December 4 is the last opportunity for public comment.

    “In reality, what it comes down to is everything will automatically be illegal to compound, except whatever tiny fraction of substances of the already small group deemed worthy by the FDA.” 

    Use of the items on the list of fact all of them are just incredibly useful and so they’re their loss from the world of being able to customize them and give them to somebody either in a different way IV or supp (3).png

    TAKE ACTION! The fate of a large number of natural medicines is under review by the FDA. COMMENT TODAY TO PROTECT YOUR ACCESS TO NATURAL SUBSTANCES that have been used for 100’s if not 1000’s of years. Comment Period Closes December 4th.

    The impact on those with Cancer seeking treatment

    Dr. Karlfeldt: Medically, there are a minimal amount of options for those with Cancer. If the medical community had solved Cancer it wouldn’t be any need for any other therapy. But currently, Cancer is one of the leading causes of death. One of the four people is going to die from Cancer. 
    One natural substance that has been used effectively against cancer when all other treatment has failed is curcumin. It’s one of 240 substances on the list to become prohibited to use by compounding pharmacies.

    How Did This All Come About?

    Dr. Anderson: The process started the FDA asked for the natural health community that uses these things and the pharmacies that make them nominate substances.  This is because the FDA didn’t know what was being made. It seemed pretty innocuous back then.  
    So the community nominated about 300 substances, many of them natural substances or compounds that are either nutrients or herbs or parts of herbs or even mineral and vitamins, amino acids that are in our body already.


    Of the 300 the FDA looked at them and basically chose 80 of the 300 to have hearing on to determine their scientific validity. The FDA then determined that everything else, about 240 substances, had no merit. They did not have a scientific review hearing.

    These substances included things such as Alfalfa, Aloe, Ginkgo, Green Tea, Nettle leaf and 235 other natural substances that will not get a review hearing. The regulatory agency refuses to hear about the benefits of these natural substances. The FDA says they should be illegal to the compound.

    The Fate of Curcumin (and the other 240 natural substances)If the FDA process is enacted as a federal rule, these substances will automatically become illegal to compound, without even having had a hearing.  Comments close on December 4. 
    Take a moment to comment.


    Dr. Karlfeldt: A natural substance like curcumin is giving an option for people over other therapies that have failed and now FDA is wanting to take that substance away from public access.
    Dr. Anderson: Curcumin. I think it’s a good example because almost everybody’s heard of curcumin at this point. 

    Used widely worldwide, there is something like 50,000 scientific papers about curcumin as medicine and many of them address cancer or inflammatory diseases etc. The FDA is posed to remove public access to the natural substance.

    What substances are affected?

    This is abbreviated list comes from the interview with Dr. Anderson with  Journal of Restorative Medicine

    Lactobacillus acidophilus, alfalfa, anise seed, certain types of copper, certain types of magnesium, a lot of minerals, a number of herbal substances that might be used in a compounded sense, and a whole host of things nominated by pharmacists that aren’t used as medicine but are used as binders or excipients (such as powdered milk) and would become illegal according to this list for a pharmacy to use. 

    Use of the items on the list of fact all of them are just incredibly useful and so they’re their loss from the world of being able to customize them and give them to somebody either in a different way IV or supp (4).png

     This action by the FDA would not affect your supplements supplier where you buy an oral pill. It would affect every other form that could be made by a legal pharmacy.

    Isn’t the FDA protecting us from these unproven agents?

    Dr. Anderson: So the process is really in my mind very unfair, and I’ve been a part of the process since the beginning. So that people know I’m speaking from primary experience. I helped write some of the testimony initially for all these substances. And then I’ve gone back to testify to the FDA over the last four years. 

    So it’s really frustrating. As a clinician, it doesn’t make logical sense that pharmacy licensed by the state board of pharmacy and regulated through FDA rules and USP rules would seem to be the safest place to get something made it, so I needed something specific.

    And what date they would not be able to have it will be illegal for that pharmacy to help you. You would think that if you had really good science and you had an excellent argument, you could prevail and win. But that is not the case. 

    I’ve been at the hearing, and what happens it’s basically if the FDA does not want to a substance ( regardless of the science) to be available for compounding, then it won’t pass the hearing. 

    The FDA board has its mind made up prior to the hearings and do not change regardless of what science and evidence are presented.

    The FDA can (and does) refuse to acknowledge the evidence and ignore the published science in order to stick with their decision to deny the use of a natural substance.

    Isn’t it a matter of science?

    Dr. Anderson: It is surprising and less you’re in the business of looking up research about nutrients and herbs and how much resources and references are available in any other natural things like licorice extract it’s been around forever with studies from all over the world.
    However,  the way the FDA hearings are set up, if these substances do not have some very clear medical indication for which they are the only treatments, the FDA essentially tells the committee that they should not approve it. 

    The end goal is regulating the use of natural substances out of existence. 

    Is this about taking away competition from the drug side? 

    Dr. Anderson: The FDA tribunal said at the hearings, numerous times that they trusted the pharmaceutical companies more than they trusted the natural health community. A pharmaceutical company can’t make money on any natural substance. 

    Let’s talk again about curcumin. It is a natural substance the pharmaceutical industry can’t patent. So it has to be altered into a chemical – then it becomes more dangerous, more regulated but more profitable.


    Dr. Anderson: There is a perfect example LIPOCURC. At the same time, we were working with the NHS integrative cancer research, a pharmaceutical company was running trials on an altered form of curcumin. We were using intervenous curcumin with an FDA registered pharmacy infusing it, without changing the molecule. A pharmaceutical company changed the curcumin molecularly so they could patent it. When we received a safety paper from their trials, we saw that they had issues at high doses. With the natural substances, we used the pathologist remarked that the blood looked better after the IV. The pharmaceutical version caused damage to the blood.

    No pharmaceutical company is going to make or sell a natural substance because it can’t be patented and profited from, even if it benefits the patients. 

    What Can I Do? 

    Comment immediately 
    Your comments may not slow down the process initially, but will give the lawyers ammunition as they appeal the FDA decision. 

    If you are a practitioner. Comment.
    If you are a patient using one of the 300 substances. Comment.
    Even if you don’t use a listed product now – Comment. 

    Click Here for the Full Interview 


    Read Hearing Comments from the FDA site: 
    https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/pharmacy-compounding-human-drug-products-under-section-503a-federal-food-drug-and-cosmetic-act

    Several partial quotes came from the excerpt of an interview with Paul Anderson, ND on the FDA’s recent stance on compounded medicine as published in the Journal of Restorative Medicine, Volume 8, Number 1, 4 January 2019, pp. 1-5(5).
    https://todayspractitioner.com/aarm/exclusive-interview-with-dr-paul-anderson-the-fda-and-the-fate-of-compounded-medicines/#.Xdr_NehKiUk

    Dr. Paul Anderson, N.M.D., is a naturopathic medical doctor and Medical Director and Founder of the Anderson Medical Group. His facility Advanced Medical Therapies is the first of its kind in the U.S., offering therapies in multiple modalities based on his over two decades of research and patient care.

    Dr. Michael Karlfeldt, ND, Ph.D, is a Board Certified Naturopath (CTN® ) with expertise in IV Therapy, Applied Psycho Neurobiology, Oxidative Medicine, Naturopathic Oncology, Neural Therapy, Sports Performance, Energy Medicine, Natural Medicine, Nutritional Therapies, Aromatherapy, Auriculotherapy, Reflexology, Autonomic Response Testing (ART) and Anti-Aging Medicine.
    The Karlfeldt Center is a comprehensive health treatment center that provides proven natural healthcare solutions for all ages and conditions. 

  • Advocates Petition FDA: Remove Neurotoxin from Hairdye

    Advocates Petition FDA: Remove Neurotoxin from Hairdye

    WASHINGTON — A group of public health advocates today announced that the Food and Drug Administration will consider removing its approval of lead acetate in hair dyes such as Grecian Formula. The group filed a joint petition that requires FDA to revisit a 1980 decision allowing the neurotoxin and carcinogen to remain in hair dye. Lead acetate is the active ingredient that slowly darkens grey hair when used every few days.

    “An FDA ban on lead acetate is long overdue,” said Tina Sigurdson, EWG assistant general counsel. “Lead acetate can expose people to lead, which has been linked to serious health problems like developmental, reproductive and organ system toxicity, as well as cancer. It’s unconscionable that this potent neurotoxin is still used in a handful of men’s hair dye formulas. Lead acetate already has been banned in Canada and the European Union. It’s time for the U.S. to take action.”

    “We now know that lead is more dangerous, especially to children, and skin absorption is a more significant route than FDA thought in 1980,” said Tom Neltner, chemicals policy director at Environmental Defense Fund. “We also have evidence that when the dye is applied, lead spreads widely in the immediate environment. This puts more people, including children, at risk of unknowingly ingesting it.”

    “Government agencies at all levels are making great strides in reducing exposures to lead from legacy sources like paint, old water pipes and other uses long-since banned,” said Howard Mielke of Tulane University School of Medicine. “The fact that FDA continues to allow a dangerous toxicant like lead acetate in consumer hair coloring products is shocking. Our petition would force FDA to get the lead out of cosmetics being sold, haphazardly used by consumers, and stored in home medical cabinets. The FDA action will bring its regulation into the 21st Century.”

    “Lead poisoning is not a problem of the past, and we will continue to damage our future and our children’s future if we do not commit to removing all sources of lead from our products, air and water,” said Eve Gartner, litigator in the Healthy Communities Program at Earthjustice, where she heads efforts to protect human health from toxic chemicals. “It is unacceptable that as we struggle to remove lead contamination in our water supplies and old homes, we still allow lead in home-use hair dyes that many people apply by hand on a daily basis. The FDA must take action now to protect people from this continued source of exposure to lead.”

    “Nearly twenty years ago, CEH action created strict rules to protect California consumers from lead acetate in hair dyes. It is long past time for FDA to take action to protect all Americans by banning this unnecessary and toxic ingredient,” said Caroline Cox, research director at Center for Environmental Health.

    In 1980, the FDA approved lead acetate as a repeated use hair dye with minimal restrictions, including a warning label and a restriction that it only be used on the scalp and not facial hair. The levels of lead in the product are allowed to be as high as 6000 ppm. Three years earlier, the Consumer Product Safety Commission banned the sale of household paint containing more than 600 ppm of lead.

    The petitioners cited major advances in science since the 1980 FDA decision allowed lead to remain in hair dye. The petition cites a study showing lead contamination from the hair dyes—especially on surfaces touched after using the hair dye like blow-dryers, combs and faucets.

    The study found these surfaces had up to 2,804 micrograms of lead per square foot. In 2001, the Environmental Protection Agency said that more than 40 micrograms of lead per square foot on the floor posed a hazard to children.

    Dr. Maricel Maffini, an expert consultant to EDF, said that “The risk from an innocent mistake is real: one user who didn’t realize it should not be used on the beard lost feeling in his hands and feet after only seven months. He did not return to normal for a year.” 

    While use of lead acetate remains common in the United States, it is prohibited in Canada and in the European Union.

    The petition was filed by Environmental Working Group, Environmental Defense Fund, Earthjustice, Center for Environmental Health, Healthy Homes Collaborative, Health Justice Project of Loyola University Chicago School of Law, Breast Cancer Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, Improving Kids’ Environment, Consumers Union and Howard Mielke.

    Under the law, the agency must make a final decision within 180 days. If the petition is approved, the ban would be effective immediately upon publication in the Federal Register.

    ###

     

    Reporters also may contact Keith Gaby at the Environmental Defense Fund: TEL (202) 572-3336

    This article originally appeared at: http://www.ewg.org/release/advocates-petition-fda-bar-toxic-lead-compound-hair-dyes.
  • ACTION ALERT: Petition to ban neurtoxic additive to our water

    ACTION ALERT: Petition to ban neurtoxic additive to our water

    New York – November 30, 2016 – A coalition of environmental, medical and health groups have served the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with a Petition calling on the Agency to ban the addition of fluoridation chemicals to public water supplies due to the risks these chemicals pose to the brain, reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).

    The Petition, which includes over 2,500 pages of supporting scientific documentation, explains that “the amount of fluoride now regularly consumed by millions of Americans in fluoridated areas exceeds the doses repeatedly linked to IQ loss and other neurotoxic effects.”  Signers  include FAN, Food & Water Watch, Organic Consumers Association, American Academy of Environmental Medicine, International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, and Moms Against Fluoridation.

    “If EPA applies its own risk assessment guidelines to fluoridation, we believe it will agree that fluoridation poses an unacceptably high risk to the brain,” says attorney Michael Connett, FAN legal adviser.

    The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authorizes EPA to prohibit the “particular use” of a chemical that presents an unreasonable risk to the general public or susceptible subpopulations. TSCA gives EPA the authority to prohibit drinking water additives.

    Subpopulations especially vulnerable to fluoride’s neurotoxic effects include infants, the elderly, kidney patients, and the nutrient deficient (e.g. iodine and calcium). Evidence also suggests that African-Americans may suffer disproportionate harm as well.

    EPA scientists characterize chemicals with human evidence of neurotoxicity as “gold standard” chemicals warranting assessment priority.  Not only is there human research on fluoride neurotoxicity, it is so extensive that fluoride is classified alongside lead, mercury and PCBs as one of only 12 chemicals “known to cause developmental neurotoxicity in human beings.” (Lancet Neurology)

    At EPA’s request, the National Research Council (NRC) reviewed fluoride toxicology research and concluded in 2006, “It is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain.”

    Since NRC’s review, 196 fluoride/brain studies have been published, including 61 human studies.

    Contrary to claims that only high doses of fluoride are linked to brain damage, studies of fluoride-exposed human populations consistently find neurotoxic effects at water fluoride levels well below the EPA’s “safe” level (4 mg/L).

    One recent study from China found that children ingesting just 1.4 milligrams of fluoride each day suffered a 5-point loss in IQ. Some children living in fluoridated areas in the United States ingest doses comparable to this level.

    Research also shows that some Americans have fluoride levels in their urine and blood that equal or exceed the levels linked to cognitive deficits.

    “As with lead, fluoride is a neurotoxic and endocrine disrupting substance that has no place in our drinking water,” Connett states. “The EPA should follow Europe’s lead and end fluoridation.”

    EPA has 90 days to respond to the Petition.

    To access a copy of the Petition, click here.

    RESOURCES: