Not sure what you think of this folks. I received this message forwarded
from EP net
Tina
----- Original Message -----
Dear All
I do hope you can urgently raise the matter of a Glaxo representative being
appointed to the OFSTED board. Glaxo/Wellcome have for almost half a century
been getting away with experiments on children in care in these islands and
around the world.
I am considering withdrawing from an OFSTED presentation, and calling on
others to do so because, as a careleaver, I think the matter is utterly
sickening. How many of those of us who were in (or are still passing
through) care know whether our own health problems were caused by drug
experiments carried out by Glaxo et al?
What about the case of Teresa Cooper (see her book, Pin Down) and her
friends on whom drug experiments were carried out leaving her and her
friends with serious health problems? Glaxo are still carrying out horrific
drug experiments on children in care around the world (see below).
On Monday June 16th, the government will be trying to convince people that
it is sincere about assisting young people with its new Children's Bill. The
Minister for Children, Ed Ball's elevation of A Glaxo representatives to
watch over children is horrendous in both its insensitivity and conception.
I am hoping that everyone will make their feelings known to OFSTED via their
organisations, unions, MPs and the press. Pleas read on.
Yours sincerely
<http://www.philframpton.co.uk>
Would You Leave Your Kids in Glaxo's Care??
First They Came for the Jews then Mengele had a New Idea....Children in
Care.......
http://www.communicationagents.com/sepp/2004/11/05/azt_nevirapine_children_in_new_york_orphanage_given_toxic_drugs.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope you have looked at Liz Davies's piece in the Guardian about the four
OFSTED appointments
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jun/12/childprotection.youngpeople.
Cable and Wireless, GlaxoSmithKline, Staufenberger, Smith & Butte and Chime
Communications are the companies providing the four successful candidates
that Ed Balls says have "the experience, skills and ability to add real
value to the board".
What about the education and care unions, and all who care asking why such
companies are involved as education and care watchdogs e.g Glaxo , by their
own admission, used kids in care for drug experiments. Most of the 1,000
plus used in one trial in the USA were black and some died. There have been
other cases in orphanages in Ireland. Glaxo continues to try drugs out on
orphans around the world.
How many of those drugs are made in Britain (see below)?
How do teachers tell their children that the children in poor countries are
used to test whether drugs are dangerous, and the testing is done by people
who run OFSTED?
At a time when police are literally picking over the bones of abused and
dead children in Jersey, it is really outrageous that Glaxo are put as
watchdogs of children in care....
Have a look below
http://www.communicationagents.com/sepp/2004/11/05/azt_nevirapine_children_in_new_york_orphanage_given_toxic_drugs.htm
HIV Negative - "Noble Doctors Try New Drugs on AIDS Orphans"
by Liam Scheff
Crux Magazine. November, 2004.
(original in PDF format here)
In June, 2003, I got a call to investigate a place called Incarnation's
Children Center (ICC), a Catholic orphanage for HIV-positive children in New
York City. I was told that terrible things were happening there.
ICC is a home for children who test HIV-positive. Some of the children are
orphans; their parents use drugs and can't care for them. Some of the
children have parents and families, but the parents have trouble enforcing
the heavy AIDS drug regimen. When that happens, the city agencies bring the
children into ICC, where their drug regimens are carried out without fail.
Their press page describes ICC as an "Ellis Island . . . envisioned as a
sanctuary of love, a home-like nurturing residence where HIV-positive
children would receive the best possible nursing and medical care while
awaiting placement into foster homes."
That didn't sound so terrible.
ICC was also receiving federal funds for running drug trials with the
children. "In 1992, an outpatient clinic for HIV-positive children was
established; the same year, with funding from the National Institute of
Allergy and Infectious Diseases [a subdivision of the NIH], the clinic
became a sub unit of the Columbia University Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials
Unit." In 1996, "under the direction of Dr. Stephen Nicholas, thirty-four
children [were] participating in seven clinical trials . . . ."
Dr. Nicholas was listed among "The Best Doctors in New York in New York
Magazine and in the 1996-97 edition of The Best Doctors in America." ICC
received government trial-funding through 2002. Dr. Nicholas has since moved
to Harlem Hospital. ICC's new medical director is Katherine Painter. She
told me that children at ICC are now enrolled in clinical trials at one of a
dozen area hospitals that work in conjunction with ICC. "Children
participating in a drug trial undergo monitoring, testing, and supply of an
experimental drug through their outpatient clinic, and we maintain that
treatment here," she said.
If I wrote for the New York Times, I would have had my story: "Noble Doctors
Try New Drugs on AIDS Orphans."
On the surface, it sounds innocuous and slightly tragic, but also heroic and
perhaps hopeful. New drugs-that can't be a bad thing, can it? AIDS orphans.
Well, if anyone deserves a new drug, it's AIDS orphans, right?
But I had doubts and lingering questions. What exactly are the "new drugs?"
Do they have any effects that are deleterious? The ICC webpage listed them.
It turned out that the drugs weren't really new at all-they were old-nearly
40 years old. The primary drug used in trials at Incarnation Children's
Center is called AZT. It was developed in 1964. So, not a new drug. Does
that matter? No, if the drug helps the kids. But there was a problem.
AZT isn't a very helpful drug-unless, I suppose, you enjoy funerals. AZT has
a very special use. It's a chemotherapy drug used to kill the cells that
make up living tissue and blood. It was designed in a cancer research lab in
1964 as a potent cell-killing agent called a nucleoside analogue. It works
by disrupting cellular replication at the genetic level.
Our DNA is made up of four bases that combine in pairs. These line up,
spiraling into a double helix. DNA codes for all our proteins; it's a
blueprint for our building blocks. AZT stops the spiral; it breaks the chain
and kills the cell. Not so innocuous, after all.
AZT never got out of the lab. It was far too effective at killing cells even
for short-term use. It was shelved, and no patent was filed.
In 1986, Burroughs Wellcome (now GlaxoSmithKline) was interested in entering
the AIDS drug market. Recycling an old drug was cheaper than designing a new
one. So AZT was brought out of storage. Test labs that ordered the drug for
experimentation received it in a package bearing a skull and crossbones on a
bright orange background. The label read "TOXIC. Toxic by inhalation in
contact with skin and if swallowed. Target organ(s): Blood bone marrow. If
you feel unwell, seek medical advice (show the label where possible). Wear
suitable protective clothing."
Today, Glaxo sells AZT under the brand name "Retrovir" and as an ingredient
in "Combivir" and "Trizivir." But the warning label tells the same story:
"Retrovir [AZT] has been associated with Hematologic Toxicity [blood
toxicity], including Neutropenia [loss of neurophils, an essential component
of blood] and Severe Anemia [potentially fatal lack of blood production] . .
. . Prolonged use of Retrovir has been associated with Symptomatic Myopathy
[muscle wasting]."
"LacticAcidosis and Severe Hepatomegaly [liver swelling] with Steatosis [fat
degeneration], including Fatal Cases, have been reported with the use of
Nucleoside Analogues [AZT, 3TC, ddl, D4T] alone or in combination, including
Retrovir and other Antiretrovirals (see warnings)."
The most surprising thing about AZT is that it doesn't even claim to work:
"Retrovir is not a cure for HIV infection . . . The long-term effects of
Retrovir are unknown at this time . . . The long-term consequences of in
utero and infant exposure to Retrovir are unknown, including the possible
risk of cancer."
This wasn't so wonderful for the kids at ICC. But it was good for Glaxo.
They make a lot of money with their AIDS drugs. Drugs containing AZT as an
ingredient account for about one billion British pounds (over 1. 5 billion
dollars) in Glaxo's 2002 sales alone. Other nucleoside analogues provide
another 470 million pounds (750 million dollars) in sales.
World Aids Scam Campaign AidsMyth.com Glaxo Wellcome was recently embroiled
in controversy over similar consent issues in vaccine tests on children in
Irish orphanages in the 1970's. ...
AHRP Testimony: Protections for Foster Children Enrolled in Clinical Trials
Submitted to Cong.Ways & Means Hearing
Wed, 18 May 2005
THE ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP)
Tel. 212-595-8974 Fax: 212-595-9086
http://www.ahrp.org
142 West End Ave. Suite 28P
New York, NY 10023
Testimony by The Alliance for Human Research Protection
Committee on Ways and Means Hearing on Protections for Foster Children
Enrolled in Clinical Trials
May 18, 2005
On March 10, 2004, The ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION (AHRP) filed a
complaint with both the Food and Drug Administration and the federal Office
of Human Research Protection (OHRP) when we learned that 36 Phase I and
Phase II AIDS drug experiments had been conducted on infants and children
who were under the guardianship of the New York City Administration for
Children's Services (ACS). The children were living at Incarnation
Children's Center, a foster care facility under contract with ACS and the
Catholic Archdiocese. We had reason to believe that the experiments were
unethical, illegal, and coercive--and that federal regulations have been
violated. We did not know at the time that children in foster care
nationwide were subjected to research exploitation at prestigious medical
research institutions.
Historically such children have been abused and exploited in medical
experiments - for that reason, federal regulations were enacted to restrict
the use of foster care children in research. The Associated Press confirms
that for more than two decades, government officials colluded with hospitals
and researchers to facilitate the enrollment of children who were in the
care of the state for experimental drug trials. Nationwide, an estimated 698
to 1,388 foster children were used to test experimental AIDS drugs - at
least 465 of those children were in the care of NYC's ACS - almost all were
children of color. How ironic it is that children, who were placed by the
courts into the protective custody of foster care agencies pursuant to the
provisions of the Adoption and Safe Homes Act of 1997, should end up further
victimized by their caretakers.
These children were exposed to pain, risks, and potentially harmful
experimental drugs - the children suffered, some died. In some cases the
children were diagnosed with HIV infection - in other cases infants were
merely "presumed" to be HIV-infected.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/this_world/4038375.stm
New York's HIV experiment
By Jamie Doran
Reporter/producer, Guinea Pig Kids
HIV positive children and their loved ones have few rights if they
choose to battle with social work authorities in New York City.
COMPLAINT UPHELD
Following a complaint, an investigation by the BBC's Editorial
Complaints Unit has identified serious failings with this programme and
ruled that some of the online material based on it was misleading.
For full details click here
Jacklyn Hoerger's job was to treat children with HIV at a New York
children's home.
But nobody had told her that the drugs she was administering were
experimental and highly toxic.
"We were told that if they were vomiting, if they lost their ability to
walk, if they were having diarrhoea, if they were dying, then all of this
was because of their HIV infection."
Jacklyn Hoerger worked at the Incarnation Children's Center
In fact it was the drugs that were making the children ill and the
children had been enrolled on the secret trials without their relatives' or
guardians' knowledge.
As Jacklyn would later discover, those who tried to take the children
off the drugs risked losing them into care.
The BBC asked the Alliance for Human Research Protection about their
view on the drug trials.
GUINEA PIG KIDS
Tuesday, 30 November, 2004
1930 GMT on BBC Two (UK)
Spokesperson Vera Sherav said: "They tested these highly experimental
drugs. Why didn't they provide the children with the current best treatment?
That's the question we have.
"Why did they expose them to risk and pain, when they were helpless?
"Would they have done those experiments with their own children? I doubt
it."
Power and authority
When I first heard the story of the "guinea pig kids", I instinctively
refused to believe that it could be happening in any civilised country,
particularly the United States, where the propensity for legal action
normally ensures a high level of protection.
But that, as I was to discover, was central to the choice of location
and subjects, because to be free in New York City, you need money.
I've had many ACS case workers tell me: 'We're ACS, we can do
whatever we want'
David Lansner, family lawyer
Over 23,000 of the city's children are either in foster care or
independent homes run mostly by religious organisations on behalf of the
local authorities and almost 99% are black or hispanic.
Some of these kids come from "crack" mothers and have been infected with
the HIV virus. For over a decade, this became the target group for
experimentation involving cocktails of toxic drugs.
Central to this story is the city's child welfare department, the
Administration for Children's Services (ACS).
The ACS, as it is known, was granted far-reaching powers in the 1990s by
then-Republican Mayor Rudi Giuliani, after a particularly horrific child
killing.
Within the shortest of periods, literally thousands of children were
being rounded up and placed in foster care.
"They're essentially out of control," said family lawyer David Lansner.
"I've had many ACS case workers tell me: 'We're ACS, we can do whatever we
want' and they usually get away with it."
Having taken children into care, the ACS was now, effectively, their
parent and could do just about anything it wished with them.
'Serious side-effects'
One of the homes to which HIV positive children were taken was the
Incarnation Children's Center, a large, expensively refurbished red-bricked
building set back from the sidewalk in a busy Harlem street.
It is owned by the Catholic church and when we attempted to talk to
officials at Incarnation we were referred to an equally expensive Manhattan
public relations company, which then refused to comment on activities within
the home.
Dr Rasnick is internationally renowned for his work on numerous
diseases, including cancer
Hardly surprising, when we already knew that highly controversial and
secretive drug experiments had been conducted on orphans and foster children
as young as three months old.
We asked Dr David Rasnick, visiting scholar at the University of
Berkeley, for his opinion on some of the experiments.
He said: "We're talking about serious, serious side-effects. These
children are going to be absolutely miserable. They're going to have cramps,
diarrhoea and their joints are going to swell up. They're going to roll
around the ground and you can't touch them."
He went on to describe some of the drugs - supplied by major drug
manufacturers including Glaxo SmithKline - as "lethal".
When approached by the BBC, Glaxo SmithKline said such trials must have
stringent standards and be conducted strictly in accordance with local
regulations.
Battle of wills
At Incarnation, if a child refused to take the medicines offered, he or
she was force-fed through a peg-tube inserted into the stomach.
Critics of the trials say children should have been volunteered to test
drugs by their parents.
Regina Mousa's grandson (left) is HIV positive and in a foster
home
When Jacklyn Hoerger later fostered two children from the home where she
used to work with a view to adopting them, she discovered just how powerful
the ACS was.
"It was a Saturday morning and they had come a few times unannounced,"
she said. "So when I opened the door I invited them in and they said that
this wasn't a happy visit. At that point they told me that they were taking
the children away. I was in shock."
Jacklyn, a trained paediatric nurse, had taken the fatal step of taking
the children off the drugs, which had resulted in an immediate boost to
their health and happiness.
As a result she was branded a child abuser in court. She has not been
allowed to see the children since.
In the film Guinea Pig Kids, we follow Jacklyn's story and that of other
parents or guardians who fear for the lives of their loved ones.
We talk to a child who spent years on drugs programmes which made them
and their friends ill, and we discover that Incarnation is not an isolated
case. The experiments continue to be carried out on the poor children of New
York City.
Guinea Pig Kids was broadcast on Tuesday, 30 November, 2004, at 1930 GMT
on BBC Two (UK).
[log in to unmask]
This story published November 11, 2000
Report fails to quell drug scandal
http://www.adoption-net.co.uk/news/2000/nov/001111irish.htm
by www.adoption-net.co.uk staff
A long-awaited report has failed to discover if consent was sought for
youngsters in Irish children's homes to be used as human guinea pigs in drug
trials.
Children in a number of homes across the republic were among those
involved in three vaccine trials by multinational drugs company Wellcome in
the 1960s and 70s.
But the report by the Irish department for health this week could not
confirm the legality of the trials as documentation detailing whether
consent had been given could not be found.
Health Minister Micheal Martin said: "This lack of documentation is, at
best, puzzling. It is certainly unsatisfactory.
"In many cases we are looking at marginal degrees of difference in the
vaccines administered, not at experimental, unproven or dangerous
medications. But the key issue, the issue of consent, cannot be fudged."
He said the report produced more questions than answers. But there was
no evidence of "serious illness" resulting from the trials, he added.
The Wellcome trials were conducted on a total of 211 children, 123 in
children's homes, including infants and teenagers.
The vaccines, for diseases including diphtheria, tetanus, polio and
rubella, were made at Wellcome laboratories in the UK.
A spokesman for the company said: "Glaxo Wellcome has cooperated fully
with the drawing up of the report and is satisfied that the report deals
with this sensitive matter in a balanced and even-handed way.
"Glaxo Wellcome regrets any distress that may have been caused to
individuals involved in these trials which were carried out more than 30
years ago."
The 40-page report has been referred by Mr Martin to an Irish commission
investigating child abuse in institutions
