Just Saying

Trump pulls out of Paris accord

The Paris agreement was a farcical attempt to halt climate change on the honor system. Its only legal requirements were for signatories to announce goals and promise progress, with no international enforcement mechanism. 

President Donald Trump announced on Thursday that his administration is backing out of the Paris Climate Accord that was agreed upon in 2015 by nearly 200 countries.
Trump said that the pact, which aims to combat climate change by reducing fossil fuel emissions, hurts American citizens and businesses.
"Compliance with the terms of the Paris accord ... could cost America as much as 2.7 million lost jobs by 2025," Trump said.
"As someone who cares deeply about the environment, which I do, I cannot in good conscience support a deal that punishes the U.S.," he added.
He explained that the agreement is a massive redistribution of U.S. wealth to other countries.

The United States and the European Union would have been forced to adopt  severe climate change rules while many of the world’s governments would avoid doing anything that would slow their own economies, think CHINA. The agreement would slow economic growth for the foreseeable future for both the U.S. economy and European Union’s  economies.  This would have given CHINA an HUGELY unfair advantage.

The Damage yo be Done to America 

 
 Industrial Carnage. The regulations necessary to implement the Paris agreement would have cost the U.S. industrial sector 1.1 million jobs, according to a study commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. These job losses would center in cement, iron and steel, and petroleum refining. Industrial output would decline sharply.
 

The states worst hit would be Michigan, Missouri, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. The industrial evisceration of the four states, according to the Chamber of Commerce study. 

Michigan’s GDP would shrink by 0.8 percent and employment would contract by 74,000 jobs. 

Missouri’s GDP would shrink by 1 percent. 

Ohio’s GDP would contract 1.2 percent. Pennsylvania’s GDP would decline by 1.8 percent and the state would lose 140,000 jobs.

 
 Small Businesses would be hurt the most grievously, while Helping Big Business. Big businesses in America strongly backed the Paris climate deal. In fact, the backers of the climate deal are America's biggest corporations; American businesses: Apple, General Electric, Intel, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Morgan Stanley, General Mills, Walmart, DuPont, Unilever, and Johnson & Johnson.

 16 companies including Shell, mining company Rio Tinto, and Walmart signed a letter to Trump, expressing their support for the U.S. to participate in the agreement. And over 1,000 companies since November 2016 have reaffirmed addressing climate change through implementing the Paris Agreement by signing the Business Backs Low-Carbon USA statement. 

 These business oligarchs can easily financially cope with costly regulations than their smaller competitors. Smaller businesses and traditional start-ups would badly hurt by the increased costs of compliance and rising energy costs.

 

 A Heritage Foundation study found that the Paris agreement would have increased the electricity costs of an American family of four by between 13 percent and 20 percent annually. It forecast a loss of income of $20,000 by 2035. In other words, American families would be paying more while making less. 

 The overall devastating effect of the agreement would have been to reduce U.S. GDP by over $2.5 trillion and eliminate 400,000 jobs by 2035, according to Heritage’s study. This would exacerbate problems with government funding and deficits, make Social Security solvency more challenging, and increase reliance on government’s spending to support households.

Our Duty

Bought and Paid for FDA approved Risperdal leaving many to suffer

RISPERDAL:

The drug was approved, by the FDA, for public use in 1993, to treat schizophrenia, a “mental disorder” for which there is no defining diagnostic test. No blood test, no saliva test, no brain scan, no genetic assay.

In 2006, the FDA approved Risperdal to treat “irritability” in autistic children. There is no defining diagnostic test for autism. The neurological damage involved can come from any cause—especially vaccines. But of course, all public health agencies deny this fact. 

In 2007, the FDA approved Risperdal to treat bipolar disorder in children between the ages of 10 and 17. Bipolar is another “mental disorder” for which there is no defining diagnostic test.

Risperdal was approved to treat three conditions, which are diagnosed by casually observing a patient’s behavior and comparing it to a menu of behaviors called schizophrenia, bipolar, and autism.

If the drug had no adverse effects, that would be one thing; but it has devastating effects. Tardive dyskinesia, a permanent “movement disorder” that signals brain damage. Suicide. Gynecomastia—boys grow female breasts.

The lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson, Risperdal’s manufacturer:

2012: J&J fined $1.2 billion for hiding adverse effects of the drug. Decision overturned on appeal.

 

2012: J&J paid out $181 million for actively promoting off-label uses for Risperdal. Doctors are permitted to prescribe a drug for unapproved uses, but drug companies cannot legally promote or urge doctors to wander into that off-label territory.

2015-2016: There are at least 1500 suits against J&J for causing boys to grow female breasts. Thus far, three verdicts have been decided in favor of the boys, for $1.75 million, $2.5 million, and $70 million.

The story of Risperdal expands and explodes when we consider the marketing effort behind it. Basically, the hustle involved claims that the drug could be used to treat a wide array of so-called disorders in children.

I will now quote extensively from a classic article written at madinamerica.com, by Paula J Caplan, PhD. The title of her article (10/30/2015) is “Diagnosisgate: A Major Media Blackout Mystery”:

“Until their identities are widely exposed, and their motives are known, the full story of the [Risperdal] harm will never be known. It is astonishing that despite six stories in the major media — including a recent, groundbreaking Huffington Post series — and the filing of numerous lawsuits, the names and conduct of the culprits have consistently been omitted.”

“The story that has been called ‘Diagnosisgate’ starts in 1995, when the man widely considered the world’s most important psychiatrist split a payoff of nearly one million dollars with two colleagues in exchange for doing two patently unethical and illegal things that created the groundwork for a major drug company to market falsely one of the most dangerous psychoactive drugs [Risperdal].”

“Part one: In return for almost half a million dollars, they ignored what was known about the drug [Risperdal] in order to manufacture a practice guideline holding up that drug as the best drug among two whole classes of related drugs for treating people who were classified as ‘schizophrenic,’ the other drugs being marketed by other drug companies. This created what is widely considered the ‘standard of care,’ the treatment that therapists are supposed to follow and that they can use in the knowledge that they are well protected from lawsuits if they follow it and their patients are harmed. The very foundation of the guideline, that it was about ‘Schizophrenia,’ is illegitimate, because – though this will surprise many people – that category has been shown to be unscientifically created and indeed has been called a wastebasket for a wide variety of feelings and behavior, many of which are caused by psychiatric drugs.” 

“Part two: After the triumvirate received a bonus of $65,000 for creating the guideline [‘treat schizophrenia with Risperdal’] speedily, their top psychiatrist wrote to the same drug company, announcing that the three had constituted themselves as an entity that was prepared, in return for about another half million dollars, to create a marketing plan for the drug. The details included finding ‘key opinion leaders’ (KOLs), who were prominent professionals in powerful positions – such as heads of state mental health or prison systems – and having them teach the Continuing Education courses that professionals are required to take, the ultimate message of those courses being that that particular drug [Risperdal] was the best one to prescribe. Another section of their marketing plan was to have a great many articles published in what are considered scientific or medical journals, all concluding that that drug was effective and should be prescribed.”

“It is not clear whether the three psychiatrists were directly involved in choosing the content of the journal articles, but the plan to produce such articles was carried out, leading to publication of pieces recommending use of the drug [Risperdal] to treat not only Schizophrenia but also Childhood Onset Schizophrenia, Schizo-affective Disorder, Bipolar Disorder in Children and Adults, Mania, Autism, Pervasive Developmental Disorder other than Autism, Conduct Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder, Psychosis, Aggression Agitation, Dementia, below average IQ, and disruptive behavior. Thus, a staggering array of psychiatric categories – many of which are as scientifically sketchy as Schizophrenia – was used to promote the drug. This massive marketing campaign proceeded despite the many major negative effects of Risperdal, including drowsiness, dizziness, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, heartburn, dry mouth, increased saliva production, increased appetite, weight gain, stomach pain, anxiety, agitation, restlessness, difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep, decreased sexual interest or ability, vision problems, muscle or joint pain, dry or discolored skin, difficulty urinating, muscle stiffness, confusion, fast or irregular pulse, sweating, unusual and uncontrollable movements of face or body, faintness, seizures, Parkinsonian symptoms such as slow movements or shuffling walk, rash, hives, itching, difficulty breathing or swallowing, gynecomastia in male children, painful erection of penis lasting for hours…and death.”

 

“Who are the characters in this mystery? Janssen Pharmaceuticals, a division of Johnson & Johnson, is the drug company, and Risperdal is the drug in question. The marketing term for Risperdal and similar drugs is ‘anti-psychotic,’ but the accurate term is ‘neuroleptic,’ reflecting the mechanism of suppressing the brain’s activity as a powerful tranquilizer. Dr. David Rothman, who wrote the expert witness report for one of the lawsuits about the marketing of Risperdal, revealed after scrupulous examination of vast numbers of internal emails between Janssen staff and the representative of the three psychiatrists, is a specialist in medical ethics and the Bernard Schoenberg Professor of Social Medicine at Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, the medical school of Columbia University. He is also director of the Center for the Study of Science and Medicine at Columbia and at the time of writing his expert witness report was president of the Institute on Medicine as a Profession. Rothman stated in his report that the [treatment] guidelines [for Risperdal] were constructed ‘in disregard of professional medical ethics and principles of conflict of interest,’ and that they ‘subverted scientific integrity, appearing to be a purely scientific venture when it was at its core, a marketing venture for Risperdal’.”

“The psychiatrist who spearheaded these [Risperdal marketing] efforts is Dr. Allen Frances, who the year before teaming with Janssen oversaw the publication of the fourth volume of the ‘Bible’ of hundreds of categories of mental illness, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, sales of which topped $100 million as a result of marketing by the lobby group called the American Psychiatric Association, which published it. By virtue of this position, he has been called the world’s most important psychiatrist. At the time, he was also Chair of the Department of Psychiatry at Duke University. The two psychiatrists who with Frances shared the nearly $1 million in payments from Janssen are Dr. John P. Docherty, who was then Professor and Vice Chairman of Psychiatry at Cornell University at the time, and Dr. David A. Kahn, who was Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Columbia University.”

 

“Now back to the mystery: Despite five individual stories in major media outlets in 2011, 2012, and 2014 about two huge Risperdal court cases filed by the state of Texas and joined by many other states, neither a single writer of any of these stories nor even the papers filed for the court cases named Frances, Docherty, or Kahn or described the fundamental roles played by their Practice Guideline and their marketing plan in the scandal. The mystery is deepened, because the authors of the media stories and the court documents did name and describe the roles of some of the KOLs [key opinion leaders], who assuredly were guilty of unethical conduct but whose participation was conceived of by Frances and his colleagues. And some of those who reaped huge financial profits from Risperdal’s false marketing – most notably Harvard University’s Dr. Joseph Biederman, who created an empire based on claims that ‘Bipolar Disorder in Children’ had been woefully underdiagnosed and untreated – have been royally outed for the enormous sums they earned. But even respected investigative journalist Steve Brill, who recently completed a unique, 15-part story of the Risperdal scandal for Huffington Post, and who described in detail many of its players and some of the patients who suffered terrible harm from the drug and who elegantly described the way that Janssen covered up data about some of the harm, left out the essential roles the Frances triumvirate played. Activist Vera Sharav of the Alliance for Human Research Protection published an online article about the Rothman Report and included the names of Frances and those two colleagues, her article was apparently picked up by only two or three bloggers and none of the major media reporters who read what she posts.”

There is more. Much more. I suggest you read Caplan’s entire article. In a half-sane world, she would have been awarded the highest possible honors for her work.

Risperdal. The long and winding trail. The severe damage. The hustle, the con. The crimes.

The lack of criminal prosecutions.

Brought to you by high authorities in the psychiatric profession and their allies.

 

 

repost:https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/05/09/risperdal-the-long-and-winding-trail-of-crimes/

islam's practice of female genital mutilation must stop

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, founder of the AHA Foundation, an African muslim who was subjected to FGM, now living in the west, wishes to help bridge that gap by explaining what the horror of female genital mutilation entails. 




There are five types of female genital mutilation performed on girls from as young as five years of age. Four of them are unarguably mutilation, and the other is designed to symbolize mutilation. I will start with the mildest.

1. The ‘nick’: The girl is held down, her legs pushed apart and a needle is used to prick her clitoris. The incision is similar to a finger prick test for diabetes, blood comes out and the girl is considered ‘cleansed’. Often there is a ritual with a little party to celebrate the procedure.

2. ‘Female circumcision’: The second method in terms of severity is often compared to male circumcision. The hood of the clitoris is cut off, in some cases the tip of the clitoris is cut off, known as clitoridectomy. In this form, an otherwise normally functioning body part is sliced off and thrown out. Disfiguring a little girl’s genitals in this way cannot rationally be considered anything but mutilation.

3. Intermediate infibulation: In the third form of FGM, as much of the clitoris as possible is dug out and removed. The inner labia are cut off and the outer labia are sewn together leaving two small holes for urination and menstruation. In places where this is done without ‘medical intervention’ girls have been known to bleed to death. After infibulation is done it is imperceptible what has taken place when the girl stands up with her legs together, but in the obstetrician’s position it is clearly visible that parts of her genitals have been removed and sewn up.
Sadly, we are only just past half way and female genital mutilation gets worse. No doubt setting out these practices in detail is disturbing but it is crucial that we speak openly about what is taking place rather than shroud it in euphemism so as not to cause offence.


4. Total infibulation: In the fourth type of FGM the clitoris and inner labia are cut off and the outer labia are cut or scraped off too, then sewn up. When the girl stands, even with her legs closed, her genitals clearly look different.  


5. Vaginal fusing: In the fifth type of FGM, which is rarely discussed, all of the fourth type is done and then the inner walls of the vagina are scratched to cause bleeding and the sewing is again done. The girl’s feet are tied together in an effort to fuse the two sides of the vagina with scar tissue to close it up. Children can die undergoing this.
 

It is hard for people outside of communities practicing FGM to understand what is taking place. One example that has stayed with me over the years was a woman in the Netherlands that I translated for. I accompanied her to visit an obstetrician as she was having great difficulty with urination and menstruation. She showed the doctor her genitals after being subjected to the fifth and most severe type of FGM with her genitals completely removed. The stunned doctor asked if she had been burned. He could not believe that what had been done to her was deliberate, he assumed it must have been a horrific accident. But, it was no accident.
 

It’s for women like her that I started the AHA Foundation as a resource to help women and girls who are truly bridging the gap between worlds and cultures. They are living in the United States under the protection of our laws and Constitution but suffering human rights abuses imported from overseas.
 

The aim of FGM in all its forms is to control female sexuality. The clitoris is removed to take physical pleasure from sex and reduce the libido. In its more severe forms, involving sewing the genitals up, the aim is to ensure the girl is a virgin on her wedding night. Many women must be surgically re-opened (or simply with a pen knife or razor blade) in order to consummate their marriage.  The consequences of FGM are ongoing psychological and physical harms from infections to fistulas and even death.

How mexican 8th Graders Act in American Public Schools

The letter by substitute teacher Tony Hill was read aloud Thursday as the state Senate considered one of five bills on illegal immigration. Hill wrote that a majority of eight-grade students who he taught recently at an unnamed Glendale school refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance and declared that "We are Mexicans and Americans stole our land."

Hill went on to write: "I have found that by substitute teaching in these areas most of the Hispanic students do not want to be educated. Most aspire to become gang members and gangsters. They hate America and are determined to "reclaim" this area for Mexico."

Women Are Physically Inferior To Men & Shouldn't Be Allowed In Infantry

Troubling Financial Questions

US tech company Twitter is unprofitable.

Twitter has never made a yearly profit, and over the past decade it has actually lost more than 2 billion dollars.

Why is it investors support Twitter stock price.  Currently, Twitter has a market cap of 11.5 billion dollars.

How in the world is that possible?

How can a company that has never made a single penny be worth more than 11 billion dollars?

Twitter is never going to be more popular than it is now.  If it can’t make a profit at the peak of its popularity, when will it ever happen?

Twitter has never turned a profit, and for the first time since going public in 2013, it reported a decline in revenue from the previous year. Its revenue was $548.3 million, down 8 percent.
Net loss was $61.6 million, or 9 cents per share, compared with a loss of $79.7 million, or 12 cents per share, a year earlier.

Then, we have Netflix most recent earnings report for the period ending March 31, 2017 shows, yet again, negative Free Cash Flow of MINUS $422 million.

Not only is that a record loss, it’s 62% worse than in Q1/2016, and over twice as bad as Q1/2015.
Netflix just keeps losing more and more money. Netflix is losing money at a pace that is exceedingly difficult to imagine, yet investors absolutely love the company.
Currently, Netflix has a market cap of 68.4 billion dollars.

 Here are 14 more Major Tech Companies who are losing billions.

1. Snapchat: At $10 billion, fast-growing Snapchat is one of the world's most valuable private tech startups. Yet the messaging service generates little revenue -- let alone profits -- and it recently sparked privacy concerns.

 

2. Box: The online filing sharing company is poised to go public on Friday after a number of false starts. But Box recently revealed it suffered a $170 million loss in its latest year of results. 

 

3. Zynga: The fact Zynga (ZNGA) is trading roughly 75% below its 2011 IPO price shows just how hard it is to consistently churn out mobile games people actually want to play. 

4. Instagram: Facebook acquired Instagram for $1 billion back in 2012, but analysts say the photo-sharing app is unlikely to be profitable. Yet it could soon be in the black as users continue to flock to the service and advertisers start to latch on too. 

5. Amazon.com: Jeff Bezos has driven Amazon (AMZN, Tech30) investors crazy by investing so heavily in the company (see: drone delivery) that profits are wiped out. Yet it's tough to argue with Amazon's track record given its $138 billion market valuation. 

6. BlackBerry: The company helped invent the smartphone market but it clearly failed to keep up with it. While CEO John Chen has stopped the bleeding, BlackBerry (BBRY, Tech30) remains a shell of its former self. 

7. Pandora: After its shares skyrocketed in 2013, Pandora (P) has come back to earth as the music company grapples with huge content costs. 

8. Weibo: It's known as China's Twitter and just like the U.S. company Weibo (WB) is also unprofitable for now. 

  9. Zillow and 11. Trulia: Both are huge names in the online      

       house-hunting business and both Zillow (Z) and Trulia (TRLA) are unprofitable. Soon they'll also be under the same roof.

 

10. Sprint: The wireless company isn't just stuck in the red, it's wildly unprofitable. Sprint (S) is expected to lose $2 billion in its current fiscal year and another $1.2 billion next year. 

11. Square: Heavy investment in new products have kept Square unprofitable. But that didn't prevent the mobile payments startup from recently landing a $6 billion valuation. 

12. JD.com: The Chinese online retailer is unprofitable but JD.com (JD) is betting heavy investment will translate into profit-making market share gains. 

14. Sony: Easily the oldest company on this list, Sony (SNE) is on track for its sixth loss in seven years due to weak demand for its TVs and cameras. 

U.S. consumers are over 12 trillion dollars in debt, and despite the fact that corporate debt has doubled since the last financial crisis, and despite the fact that the federal government is 20 trillion dollars KNOWN US dollars in debt, the US public seem to be convinced that this irrational stock market bubble can keep inflating indefinitely.

 


Where is all the money flowing? It seems down a deep hole with no hope of return.   The last time the United States was in a deep depression it took a second World War to recover.  What do we see happening in Washington?  The War Hawks at the behest of the global bankers are pushing for a confrontation with Russia and Syria and by extension Iran.   The entire North Korea puppet show is nothing more then the US keeping the US public occupied with fear.  We could see a false flag used an an impetus to force the United States into another major global conflict. All for the purpose of consolidating global banking power at ANY cost.
 

From The National ANTIFA Front