Thursday, August 30, 2012

Gates to target Vaccine Truthers

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Gates Foundation Funds Surveillance of Anti-Vaccine Groups

Sayer Ji, Contributor
Activist Post 

The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation launched the Grand Challenges in Global Health (GCGH) in partnership with the National Institutes of Health in 2003 which, according to the GCGH website, is aimed at "creating new tools that can radically improve health in the developing world." So far, 45 grants totaling $458 million were awarded for research projects involving scientists in over 30 countries. [1]

But where has all the money actually gone? Towards developing and implementing water purification and sanitation systems? Or basic nutritional support aimed at optimizing immune function? How about providing shelter and medical facilities for the homeless? Not even close. 

For example, a $100K grant was recently disbursed to Seth C. Kalichman, professor at the Department of Psychology, University of Connecticut, for "Establishing an Anti-Vaccine Surveillance and Alert System," which intends to "establish an internet-based global monitoring and rapid alert system for finding, analyzing, and counteracting misinformation communication campaigns regarding vaccines to support global immunization efforts." [emphasis added]

We can only wonder what organizations might be labeled as "misinformation communication campaigns" considering the fact that Bill Gates, in a Feb. 4th, 2011 interview on CNN with Sanjay Gupta said that "anti-vaccine groups 'kill children.'" Here is the full quote:
So it's an absolute lie that has killed thousands of kids. Because the mothers who heard that lie, many of them didn't have their kids take either pertussis or measles vaccine, and their children are dead today. And so the people who go and engage in those anti-vaccine efforts -- you know, they, they kill children. It's a very sad thing, because these vaccines are important.

It is quite possible that any dissenting voice not in support of universal vaccination campaigns may be included in this type of "surveillance and alert system" as a potentially endangering the lives of others, i.e. "killing children." What is so ironic about the situation is that the Gates Foundation-supported Polio Global Eradication Initiative may have resulted in over 47,500 cases of vaccine-induced paralysis in Indian children in 2011 alone, and which is twice as deadly as the wild-type polio it claimed to have put an end to officially on Jan. 11 2012. Who here then, is truly concerned about the health of children?

Moreover, it is exceedingly difficult to view Bill & Melinda Gates foundation's GCGH as a strictly humanitarian foundation considering many of the projects it chooses to fund. Here are a few listed on their website which have already received funding.
  • Synthetic Lymph Nodes: Steven Meshnick and Carla Hand of the University of North Carolina in the U.S. will develop a bio-compatible, biodegradable polymer device that can be placed under the skin to introduce vaccines and antigens to the immune system. The device will attract immune cells and trigger their proliferation as well asact as an adjuvant at the site of injection. If successful, the device could help boost immune response to new and existing vaccines. [see our article on transhumanistic technologies].
  • Needle Free Vaccination Via Nanoparticle Aerosols: Vaccine delivery systems that target specific areas of the body have the potential to be especially effective against some types of infection. For example, inhaled vaccines may better guard against respiratory diseases, such as tuberculosis, and those that commonly infect the tissues of the nose and throat, such as diphtheria. Dr. Edwards is leading a multidisciplinary team using materials science technologies combined with infectious disease, device, and toxicology expertise to reformulate tuberculosis and diphtheria vaccines into aerosol sprays that can be inhaled. The team's ultimate objective is to develop a cell-based BCG vaccine for tuberculosis and a protein antigen CRM 197 vaccine for diphtheria in the form of novel porous nanoparticle aggregate (PNAP) aerosols.
  • Plant-Produced Synthetic RNA Vaccines: Alison McCormick of Touro University, California in the U.S. will test the ability of a low-cost plant-based synthetic biology method to produce a combined viral protein epitope with an antigen RNA expression system for use in an RNA malaria vaccine. Using plants for this viral transfection system could make RNA vaccine production scalable and cost effective.
  • Profitable Vaccine Distribution In Emerging Markets: Lisa Ganley-Leal and Pauline Mwinzi of Epsilon Therapeutics, Inc. in the U.S. will test the hypothesis that selling vaccines through medicine shops in emerging markets can lead to profits for both vaccine developers and the small business owners. Demonstrating profitability may lead pharmaceutical companies to invest greater resources in vaccine development and distribution and develop local partnerships for profitability strategies.
  • Genetically Programmed Pathogen Sense and Destroy: Saurabh Gupta and Ron Weiss of Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the U.S. proposed creating sentinel cells that can detect the presence of a pathogen, report its identity with a biological signal, and secrete molecules to destroy it. This project's Phase I research demonstrated that commensal bacteria can be engineered to detect and specifically kill the model bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa. In Phase II, Gupta and Weiss will engineer the human microbiota to specifically detect and destroy the gut pathogen Shigella flexneri, which is responsible for high mortality rates in children.
  • Vaccine in a Salt Shaker: A New, Safe, Low-Cost Approach: Shiladitya DasSarma will lead a team at the University of Maryland, Baltimore in the U.S. to develop an inexpensive, safe, and effective oral vaccine against invasive Salmonella disease using gas-filled bacterial vesicles. The project seeks to produce a salt-encased, shelf-stable vaccine requiring no refrigeration for distribution worldwide.
  • A Humanized Mouse Model to Evaluate Live Attenuated Vaccine Candidates: To develop new vaccines against some of the world's biggest killers, including HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis, scientists must be able to evaluate promising candidates. Some of the most promising potential vaccines, are made from weakened live versions of the infectious agent. As a result, they cannot be studied in human trials unless researchers can be confident that the weakened vaccines will be safe. Dr. Flavell and his colleagues are working to genetically engineer laboratory mice whose immune systems are similar enough to humans to permit testing of vaccines against diseases that disproportionately affect people in the developing world.
  • Alternative Delivery of Human Milk Proteins to Infants: Qiang Chen of Arizona State University in the U.S. proposes to engineer edible plants, such as lettuce and rice, to express beneficial proteins found in human milk. The protein bodies in these plants allow for the stable, high accumulation of these human milk proteins, and the plants can either be eaten directly by infants or formulated into baby food to provide essential nutrients and antibacterial benefits.
  • Non-Hormonal Female Contraceptive Targeting Egg-Specific Metalloprotease:John Herr of the University of Virginia in the U.S. will research the egg-specific membrane enzyme metalloprotease as a target for a non-hormonal female contraceptive. After determining the nature of the enzyme's catalytic pocket, a family of peptidomimetic compounds will be tested for their ability to bind to the enzyme and block its key role in egg fertilization.
  • Bacillus-Fermented Natto as Edible Vaccines for the Developing World: Michael Chan of the Ohio State Research Foundation in the U.S. will develop an engineered strain of bacteria used to ferment beans in traditional Asian and African diets, to display an antigen from the Tuberculosis bacterium. The engineered bacillus will then be used to make the traditional Asian dish natto, which can serve as a kind of oral vaccine to elicit a strong immune response. If successful, this strategy can be used to introduce a variety of disease antigens through culturally accepted foods.
  • Nanotechnology-Based Contraception: David Clapham of Children's Hospital Boston in the U.S. will develop and test a nanoparticle contraceptive that releases sperm tail inhibitors in response to vaginal pH changes or exposure to prostatic fluid. If successful, the nanoparticles could be incorporated into a vaginal gel to block sperm motility required for fertilization.
  • Circumcision tool For Traditional Ceremonies In Africa: Kathleen Sienko of the University of Michigan in the U.S. has developed a prototype circumcision tool for use in traditional ceremonies in Africa, and seeks to demonstrate the functionality, cultural suitability, and potential for low-cost mass production of the device. Such a tool could increase the circumcision rates leading to lower rates of HIV transmission in the region.
  • Discovery of Chemosensory Molecules as Novel Contraceptives: John Ngai and Scott Laughlin of the University of California, Berkeley in the U.S. seek to identify chemical compounds in the female reproductive system that guide sperm cells to the egg. By characterizing these "odorants," synthetic versions can be produced and administered to disrupt this navigation system thus inhibiting fertilization.
  • Transgenic Cow Milk Containing Human Antimicrobial Protein: Hironori Matsushima of the University of Toledo in the U.S. will test the hypothesis that adding an antimicrobial peptide to powdered milk products can confer protection against enteric diseases. Research will focus on testing the peptide for its ability to kill pathogens in stomach conditions, and on its ability to maintain integrity through the milk pasteurization and drying processes.
  • Ultrasound as a Long-Term, Reversible Male Contraceptive: James Tsuruta and Paul Dayton of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill will study the ability of therapeutic ultrasound to deplete testicular sperm counts. Characterizing the most beneficial timing and dosage could lead to the development of a low-cost, non-hormonal and reversible method of contraception for men.
You will notice from the examples listed above that all of these funded projects involve the development of proprietary (read: potentially profitable) and as-of-yet unproven technologies, and which will require the transformation and/or alteration of a natural process or substance. Also, many of the grant disbursements have gone towards contraception. This appears to diverge from the GCGH's mission statement of "improving health in the developing world," insofar as it is focused onreducing population in the developed world, rather than supporting the health of those alreadyliving, in need of help.

[1] Grand Challenges In Global Health, About Us

Professional Assassination Of an Autism Expert

The Professional Assassination Of Autism Expert Lisa Blakemore-Brown

December 29, 2010
Christina England
Dec. 29, 2010
The story of what happened to the UK professional Lisa Blakemore-Brown when she voiced her concerns about vaccines, has all the intrigue and drama associated with an Agatha Christie crime novel. The sad reality is that this has not been written as a work of fiction but to expose the horrific facts surrounding her case and the efforts made to cover up vaccine damage in children.
Her case began when a number of unsubstantiated complaints arrived at the offices of the British Psychological Society attacking the professionalism of the leading educational psychologist and expert in autism Ms. Lisa Blakemore-Brown. Instead of backing their psychologist as one would expect, the BPS backed the complainants and accused Ms Blakemore-Brown of being paranoid. On each occasion she won her case, one complaint turning out to be based on a forged document and the final complaint being lodged by a support group heavily funded by a drugs company.  Despite her spectacular wins however, she not only lost her home but she has had her career totally sabotaged.
I have always been shocked and frankly appalled that Ms Blakemore-Brown’s case has not been written about in full. There was no media coverage of her case and no articles of support before it. There were no protests outside the gates of the BPS for her as she struggled to cope with the pressure and no evidence of support from the families that she had so gallantly fought for.
Paranoia of course, as we know, is an ugly word along as with an accusation of paranoia comes stigma, prejudice and discrimination. In fact, this wonderfully talented and gifted professional was being treated in exactly the same way as the many families she had helped over the years who had been falsely accused of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (a diagnosis given to a mother or care giver to describe aspects of their behaviour. This behaviour usually includes subjecting what appears to be a previously healthy child to unnecessary and often painful tests or medical interventions i.e.: scans, x-rays and even surgical procedures to gain attention from the medical profession) This leads us to question whether this was why the BPS turned what should have been a simple ‘conduct case’ into a ‘fitness to practise’ hearing, carried out behind closed doors with accusations of paranoia and an enforced psychiatric assessment. Common sense tells us that any professional that is deemed paranoid by their governing body automatically has their past work professionally discredited. I personally believe that this was what was aimed for in this case.
Two professionals did write in support of Ms Blakemore-Brown to the BPS. These were Earl Frederick Howe – House of Lords and Dr Michael Innis, who both viewed Ms Blakemore-Brown as a professional of integrity and gave very high accounts of her excellent work.
I am honoured that I have been given the opportunity to write about the case of Lisa Blakemore-Brown, which is one that shows monumental injustice. Her case was instigated, in my opinion, by financially motivated pharmaceutical companies, corrupt governments and a failing system. I hope in writing this I can begin to expose the real truth of what can happen to a professional who speaks out against vaccines and their dangers.
Lisa Blakemore-Brown is an independent applied psychologist specialising in ADHD, Asperger Syndrome and related disorders. Her research focuses on early intensive system intervention and the increasing professional recognition of the interweaving of ADHD, Asperger Syndrome and related disorders. For this interweaving of disorders she uses her own metaphor ‘Tapestry Disorders’.
In 1996, Ms Blakemore-Brown was introduced to and asked to assess twin girls whose mother had been accused of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (MSBP).The paediatrician and expert leading the case at the time was the since discredited Professor David Southall.
After spending many hours researching the twin’s background and studying the vast quantity of medical records ascertaining to the case, Ms Blakemore-Brown discovered that these two little girls had been born prematurely, at just 26 weeks and were severely disabled.  Against all odds, the twins managed to survive, even after they both suffered multiple complications which included brain haemorrhages. Ms Blakemore-Brown diagnosed the twins with Autistic Spectrum Disorder and ADHD saying that they were, in fact, very disabled little girls, Professor Southall and social services disagreed, stating that these little girls were normal. Professor Southall later admitted on a television documentary surrounding the case, that he had no expertise in psychology or indeed the condition ADHD. Why did he go against Ms Blakemore-Brown’s expert opinion when in fact he knew nothing whatsoever about psychology or the condition  ADHD?
Ms Blakemore-Brown spoke about the case more recently at the Convention of Modern Liberty and said:
Back in 1996 I was an Expert Witness in a Court case involving autistic spectrum hyperactive identical twin girls who had been born at 26 weeks gestation in 1984. The behaviour of the twins, one in particular, was so difficult for the mother to manage especially with two other younger children, that she threatened to sue the authorities if they had missed the nature of the twins’ problem. This triggered an allegation of Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy (MSBP) – that she was fabricating or inducing the children’s behaviours/illnesses. What became clear to me was that Social workers, the Court and other professionals were being groomed by perverted logic to see real disorders and symptoms of real illness as child abuse.”
In 1996, the case went to court and despite Ms Blakemore-Brown’s evidence, the twin’s mother lost all four of her children to the care of social services.
It was around this time that Ms Blakemore-Brown began to have serious concerns about other cases involving autistic children she was assessing. Many of these were where the parents had also been accused of MSBP particularly she noticed after the parents had claimed that their children’s problems only began after a vaccine had been administered. In 1997, she wrote about her concerns in a letter that was published by the BPS in the magazine thePsychologist .
In June 1998 an article appeared in  also written The Therapist by Ms Blakemore-Brown; this was a year after Sir Roy Meadow (a British paediatrician who had risen to initial fame for his 1977 academic paper on MSBP and his crusade against parents who wilfully harm or kill their children and also famous for endorsing “one sudden infant death is a tragedy, two is suspicious and three is murder, until proved otherwise“ now known as Meadow’s Law) had himself written an article for The Therapist. Ms Blakemore-Brown says that the Editor of The Therapist had contacted her after reading her letter in thePsychologist, asking her if she would write an article showing the opposite view, to start a debate.
In her article which she entitled False illness in children – or simply false accusations , she described a tragic case that she had been involved with involving a child that had developed a dangerously high fever, immediately after routine vaccinations. Shortly thereafter, he began to bang his head, soil and lost all his language. After many investigations, the child was diagnosed as having Asperger’s Syndrome. The mother began to suspect that the vaccinations were the root of the child’s problems and decided not to have her other children vaccinated. As time went on, she became desperate for help and turned to the social services, begging them for respite care because she was finding her elder son difficult to manage. Instead of the help this mother so badly needed, she was accused of MSBP and her children were taken away from her.
In foster care, the youngest child, a little girl, was vaccinated against the wishes of her mother. Instantaneously and tragically, her behaviour deteriorated the same way as her brother’s had, only this time the foster carer had video tapes of before and after vaccinations to prove this. Despite this evidence, both of the younger children were adopted. Ms Blakemore-Brown wrote:-
I have now seen details of many cases where children were wrongly taken from their families”.
In 1999, Ms Blakemore-Brown gave evidence in the Griffiths Inquiry. This inquiry was looking into the alleged malpractice of Professor David Southall.
When the Griffiths Report came out, Ms. Blakemore-Brown was named as a professional who had given evidence in relation to the mistaken thinking and logging of evidence of cases involving MSBP. The Griffiths Report included a paragraph on the concerpt of Munchausen’s Syundrome by Poxy (‘MSBP’) and its potential for errors of judgement. This led Ms. Blakemore-Brown to be conversant with the evolution of the MSBP guidelines.
Shortly after and with Ms. Blakemore-Brown fighting breast cancer, she went to New Zealand to give evidence in a case involving the mother of the twins, who had by this time fled to NZ to start a new life. Whilst away, Ms. Blakemore-Brown had her home burgled by a mother accused of MSBP, who had told Ms. Blakemore-Brown that she was suffering terminal cancer. Consequently, Ms. Blakemore-Brown had allowed her to stay in her home with her children to give them a holiday as her home was by the sea. Ms. Blakemore-Brown said that she could help care for her elderly dog and answer her phone. Ms. Blakemore-Brown soon discovered that this was in fact an elaborate hoax, as when she came home she found that her papers on the Griffiths Inquiry had been stolen and her home had in fact been ransacked. She then had a call from a professional she knew in the North, who was claiming that this woman had arrived in their offices and spent the whole day in what can onloy be described as sabotaging Ms. Blakemore-Brown’s reputation. This was the very day she had said to Ms. Blakemore-Brown that she was supposed to be having possible life saving surgery.
Despite this, Ms Blakemore-Brown continued to speak out about her fears of vaccine damage and in particular, the use of Thimerosal in vaccines and the overuse of the label MSBP to blame parents for their children’s disabilities. Ms Blakemore-Brown attributed this overuse to the work of Professor David Southall and Professor Roy Meadow.
During this time, she complained to both the General Medical Council and the Department of Health, asking for a public health inquiry. She was ignored. In fact Ms Blakemore-Brown wrote several times to the Government, even sending a letter to Jackie Smith, the then Health Secretary, demanding that action be taken. Jackie Smith returned this with a curt reply, saying that her fears had been documented.
In 2000, Ms Blakemore-Brown launched her book Reweaving the Autistic Tapestry in which she featured the case of a child she called Lorelei (name was changed to protect identity). This was a child who had reacted to the pertussis vaccine and in this case, the hospital had noted it in her medical records. The little girl went on to develop Kawasaki Syndrome, (KS is characterized by fever, rash, swelling of the hands and feet, irritation and redness of the whites of the eyes, swollen lymph glands in the neck, and irritation and inflammation of the mouth, lips, and throat) which has been attributed to vaccine damage by many renowned professionals including Dr Michael Innis. The consultant Gillian Baird referred the child to Ms Blakemore-Brown to be assessed because the child had also developed Asperger’s Syndrome.
Ms Blakemore-Brown later wrote about the case in a letter to the British Medical Journal rapid response on the Internet. The BMJ wrote to the parents to check that the information was correct and then published the letter saying that the information was correct.
At this time, Thimerosal was being used in many childhood vaccines. Thimerosal was first put into vaccines by the drug company Eli Lilly. Ms Blakemore-Brown had mentioned in her book that vaccines were a possible cause of ‘Tapestry disorders’ in children.  At the back of the book Ms Blakemore-Brown had mentioned names of lawyers that dealt ‘with claims against manufactures on the basis that autism has been caused by mercury and in particular Thimerosal’. Of course looking back, if this had later been proven to be the case and Lorelei had reacted to the Thimerosal in the DPT vaccine, this would mean that Eli Lilly could be sued for billions of pounds by parents worldwide. Suddenly the book disappeared and parents desperate to have a copy were being told that this was an ‘extremely rare book‘. Was this an early indication that Ms Blakemore-Brown has inadvertently hit upon something that was very damaging not only to the pharmaceutical industry but also the UK government?
This does appear very odd indeed because just a few weeks before this book had been a best-seller on various Autism websites and was the number one best-seller on the Attention Deficit Disorder Information Service (ADDISS) website. This is what Ms Blakemore-Brown had to say in an article she later wrote:-
“Tomorrow, the General Medical Council will start the case against Dr Andrew Wakefield and two other doctors who raised concerns about children they assessed in the nineties, very worried that the problems they found were linked to adverse reactions to the MMR vaccine.
As there has been an almighty reaction by the Pharmaceutical lobby, there has been NO public debate on exactly what has been going on.
In my book, Reweaving the Autistic Tapestry, having seen too many children with what I called ‘tapestry impairments’ many of which developed following the DTP and in fewer cases, the MMR, I suggested there may be a ‘tapestry’ causal effect with vaccines as one thread.
I mentioned Thimerosal and included some lawyer’s details here and in the US.
The launch of the book was at a CHADD conference in Anaheim California in October 2001. Eli Lilly were on the next stand and bought a copy of the book.
On my return to the UK, there was no contact from the publisher.
Within weeks of my book being published, parents were being told by Amazon that it was a ‘rare book’ and that it would take a year to get and would cost $79 plus post and packing!!!
There were none in the shops.
There were none in the warehouses of the retailers.
There were none in the distributors.
The UK National Autistic Society carry all the books on Autism – except mine.
Probably nothing to do with my concerns about the vaccine, a small part of the book incidentally, or about my concern about the use of the label Munchausen Syndrome by proxy when children were genuinely ill – many had suffered reactions to vaccines. The fact that during the time my editor was working on the book, he was invited to change jobs and work on the MSBP/Factitious Illness Guidelines at the RCPCH – Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, I am sure was total coincidence.
Guess I’m just paranoid when it comes to the things done by the powerful vaccine lobby and the need to protect the vaccine programme more than the public…
Prior to the documentary, My Family and Autism, being aired on the BBC, over a year after the trip to Anaheim in which I am seen undertaking an assessment, I was able to at least get the book made more accessible.
If just one person is allowed to speak about their concerns without being leapt on from a great height, I might have confidence that the vaccine programme is safe – but I think they have gone too far and protested too much.
We all now want to know WHY???”
The book issue was not the only strange thing to happen at this time. A series of strange things were beginning to happen; hate posts began to be posted on the Internet site Mothers against Munchausen Allegations (MAMA). This was highly unusual as the site was aimed at supporting mothers who found themselves falsely accused of MSBP. These posts referred to Ms Blakemore-Brown as being unprofessional and a danger to children, some even indicating that she was mad using phrasing such as ‘barking mad’ or ‘paranoid’. At around this time Ms Blakemore-Brown also began to get abusive emails, Ms Blakemore-Brown says that one in particular she remembers was from a Ms Penny Mellor, a campaigner and one of the main contributors to the MAMA board, according to Ms Blakemore-Brown this email was extremely hurtful stating in capitols ‘ UNDERSTAND THIS – YOU ARE IRRELEVANT’ then about Ms Blakemore-Brown’s book she had added ‘Tapestry? Weaving? More like basket case!!!!‘ . Shortly after losing her home due to legal costs from the first hearing, Ms Blakemore-Brown managed at last to set up her dream unit, ‘The Tapestry Life Centre’, at the Brunel University in London to support and aid children with autism. This was to be one of the first of its kind but within days of the news of the Centre being made public, the MAMA website, became littered with posts containing the most dreadful slander and libel, sneering at her efforts and asking where the money came from.
Another strange event surrounded the documentary mentioned by Ms Blakemore-Brown in her piece above. Although Ms Blakemore-Brown was featured heavily in the original documentary which was filmed at the Brunel University in July 2003 when the film was made on that documentary starring Helena Bonham-Carter entitled ‘The Magnificent Seven’ Lisa Blakemore-Brown had been airbrushed out.
The BBC say that this was because it was impossible to show all aspects of the documentary and that the film was based on the family itself.
In 2004 Jamie Doward wrote a piece in the Observer entitled Ministers told child harm theory was flawed | UK news | The Observer This article heavily featured Blakemore-Brown and received front-page coverage. Just a month later, Ms Blakemore-Brown along with Charles Pragnell, Helen Hayward-Brown, Dr Kalokerinos and Dr Innis were asked to speak at a conference in Sydney Australia. The Sydney Conference was the first International conference to challenge the diagnoses of MSBP and SBS. The conference was heavily covered at the time by the world press but strangely enough, not here in the UK.  Blakemore-Brown in the same year gave a speech at House of Lords on MSBP which she called MSBP – A PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC TRAP
The speech was a huge success.
It was around this time that the second complaint had gone in to the BPS about Ms Blakemore-Brown.
Had Ms Blakemore-Brown become a public embarrassment to the government, and just who was behind the complaint?
In 2005, Blakemore-Brown was involved in the writing of the Consensus Paper, entitledMisdirection of Social Policy, a powerful document outlining faults in the system when looking at MSBP.
The Consensus document was written by a large group of professionals from various walks of life who saw a system was failing. It appeared that the result was that a large number of innocent parents were being accused of MSBP. These were parents with children who were sick or disabled that were being denied help. These professionals came together to discuss and draw up a document outlining what they saw going wrong and why. It was written for politicians and the government, to advise where the problems were seen to be and where changes may be made, for this reason it was not a Scientific document but a consensus of views. There are many instances where opinions are sought from service users and professionals.
The recommendations should have been discussed further to allow further development of policy. This was the logical way forward. The document had no named author. This was to protect the identities of all the professionals due to the fear of harassment. Sadly the Consensus document was heavily criticized by the media and certain campaign groups including the MAMA internet site, some of who never checked out the facts before voicing their opinions. Every opinion should count when there is a discussion of further improvements of policy. If the scientific community had reservations in accepting this document, they could have used it as a baseline to develop further larger studies containing a random group of cases. The recommendations could have been investigated further but it seems that the child protection specialists have so far failed to examine the issues to determine whether or not they can be implemented.
Specialists from the scientific community have mistaken it and compared the document to a scientific paper when it was simply a consensus of opinions and suggestions to be taken on board and perhaps examined in more detail.
The Consensus was written to effect change. This was a document to enable better guidelines and the changes suggested may have been implemented within government legislation. Recommendations were made and changes could have happened. The document was sadly shelved and gathers dust. The vast divide between child protection specialists and the parent population has caused a serious failure in communication. This in turn now results in falsely accused parents. Their real plight is often undermined or discarded. Various nefarious campaigning groups have overshadowed the true suffering of those who have been wrongly diagnosed. Perhaps this consensus document could be considered by the child protection specialists, government officials and those responsible for creating current policy. A proper robust policy should be developed to enable the protection of the child and the protection of the parent – equally.
Despite the Consensus document backing parents who had been falsely accused of MSBP and aiming to put new guidelines in place, the MAMA website appeared to once again sabotage Ms Blakemore-Brown’s efforts, siding instead with an article written in The Guardian by Jonathan Gornall entitled ‘No names, no proof, no consensus’ that attacked the document because it had no named authors.
In March 2007, Ms. Blakemore-Brown was featured in the ‘Spectator’ in a piece entitled, What killed Sally Clark’s child? | The Spectator which explained a UK case involving a mother who had been jailed for three years after being accused of killing her baby, despite him dying just five hours after the DPT vaccine .In fact Sally lost not one but two of her children within hours after vaccines.
The article began:-
Sally Clark spent three and a half years in jail wrongly convicted of murdering two of her babies after a jury was assured there was no other explanation for their sudden deaths than that she had deliberately smothered them. Yet five hours before her second child, Harry, was found lifeless in his baby chair, he had been injected with a combined vaccine with a long history of serious adverse reactions.
Harry was eight weeks old, the regulation age for the first of three injections against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (DTP) and Hib (a bacterial infection that can cause meningitis). He was also given an oral polio vaccine. His biological age was five weeks, as he had been born three weeks premature. Because of the previous sudden death of his brother, Christopher, his breathing was being monitored. He was uncharacteristically dozy from the time of his jabs to the time he died.
Not many people know these facts, because at Sally’s trial the defence did not mention immunisation as a possible cause of death. Two prosecution witnesses, including the paediatrician Professor Sir Roy Meadow, assured the jury it could be discounted. Their statements went unchallenged, and the issue did not form any part of the appeal hearings. Professor Meadow, a former member of a Department of Health sub-committee on adverse reactions to vaccines, told the jury that he could not think of any natural explanation for Harry’s or Christopher’s deaths. ”
However, the expert witness in this case was Professor Sir Roy Meadow. Meadow, it has since been discovered sat on meetings discussing sudden infant deaths after the DPT vaccination years earlier when he say on the Joint Committee of Vaccination and Immunisation, an organisation that decides vaccine policy in the UK. He knew only to well the DPT vaccine could cause sudden infant deaths in some children. IN the Sally Clark case however, he told the jury that vaccinations were unlikely to be the cause of the children’s death. To read papers about those meetings Click Here
During all this time, strange events just continued to happen to Ms Blakemore-Brown including her computer being hacked, her phone being tapped and death threats. More and more despite her dedication and exceptional work on the MSBP/Vaccine issues she found her self pushed aside and cut out of any media or political coverage surrounding the issues. Blakemore-Brown explained about one of the strange occurrences in her article The Politics And Commerce Of Autism By Lisa – ***** THE POLITICS …
I was contacted by Judith Barnard and asked to speak at a conference looking at various matters pertaining to autism and they wanted me to speak on my concerns about MSBP. I agreed and this went ahead at Regents College in Regents Park London. I was also asked to meet with Judith Gould at the National Autistic Society to discuss matters. They apologised for not taking seriously my concerns in 1997, saying that they too now had a family being destroyed by a false allegation of MSBP and had finally seen what I had been trying to tell them some 5 years earlier. There was understandable deep concern about the Guidelines and the section I had picked out. Subsequently Judith Gould, Lorna Wing and Judith Barnard attended a meeting at the Department of Health.
They met Jacqui Smith and a civil servant, Jenny Gray. I was not invited to the meeting and from that time on, no one contacted me again from the NAS, well certainly not in a supportive manner. Something clearly happened at that meeting. My book, Reweaving the Autistic Tapestry: Autism, Asperger’s Syndrome and ADHD, is the only book on autism published by Jessica Kingsley that the NAS do not carry. I address concerns about the use of MSBP, concerns about the possibility that vaccines are implicated in autism, and a full chapter on how the educational system failed children with special educational needs”
So who were behind all these strange events and just what had Ms Blakemore-Brown said that was so important that she needed to be silenced? Had she inadvertently uncovered something that was very worrying indeed to the drugs companies and the UK government? The events that followed appear to indicate that this could well be the case.
It soon materialised that the National Autistic Society who no longer supported Ms Blakemore-Brown or her work were being funded by the drugs company Glaxo SmithKline.
In my article Is There More To Professor Simon Baron-Cohen Than Meets The Eye, I showed how the NAS was receiving funding from Glaxo SmithKline by citing the GSK website which said:-
National Autistic Society (NAS)
NAS provides support and advice to families and individuals across the autistic spectrum and are increasingly concerned by the lack of information and advice available to GPs and health professionals in terms of diagnosing this condition.
We have supported this organisation since 2003.
During 2006:
Our charitable donation of £9,988 will fund a targeted mailing to over 4,000 GP´s surgeries in the UK with information about autism, NAS and their services.
Our funding represents 0.15 per cent of their income overall.”
It then emerged that the group ADDISS was behind the new complaint against Ms Blakemore-Brown .
Given the profound need for such efforts and such facilities espoused by none other than Jacqui Smith at the Kings Fund Centre just a few months earlier and the considerable media exposure of the wrongful convictions of women accused of killing their children by Professor Sir Roy Meadow, I had every reason to feel optimistic about the Centre, my own future and that of the children I dedicated my working life to.
Within a matter of weeks, another vexatious complaint was drummed up with a group called ADDISS heavily involved at the outset. This group was just beginning to receive considerable funding from Eli Lilly, the pharmaceutical company which first produced Thimerosal, a mercury-containing vaccine preservative implicated in the rise in autism. Liam Byrne, a Labour Minister who has also had responsibility for matters linked to autism, defended the funding this same group received from the Department of Health at the same time. He was also brought in to spin out the considerable number of recommendations following a two year Select Committee Parliamentary inquiry into the influence of the Pharmaceutical Industry.
Despite knowing about the actions of this group from a colleague, the British Psychological Society ploughed on. The University was bombarded with vexatious calls relating to me and the Director was told, out of the blue, to take early retirement. It was all quite shocking for everyone”
It was around this time and completely out of the blue, another complaint went in to the BPS. This time the complaint was from Penny Mellor, herself an avid campaigner against false allegations of child abuse and the main contributor to the website MAMA. Ms Mellor implied that Ms Blakemore-Brown was not fit to practise and was in her opinion mentally ill.
Ms Blakemore-Brown was shocked as she had only ever met Ms Mellor on three occasions. However. Ms Mellor had tried to sabotage every attempt Ms Blakemore-Brown made to expose the ever increasing number of parents being falsely accused after a vaccine injury had occurred.
Suddenly and without warning Ms Blakemore-Brown was asked to leave the university and close down the Tapestry Life Centre; her lifetime’s dream was shattered.
On winning her case in 2008, three years after the complaint was originally filed, Ms Blakemore-Brown promptly resigned from the BPS as she no longer wanted any association with an organisation she felt was as corrupt as their counterpart, the GMC.  She continued to speak out until the middle of 2009.
Little has been heard from Ms Blakemore-Brown since then. Has she finally called it a day and realised that the drug companies and the UK government have just become too powerful when it comes to vaccinating our children? Well I am sure that is what they would like to think. After all, it would be another ‘notch on their bedpost’ so to speak. Ms Blakemore-Brown has this saying, however: ‘Slowly, Slowly, Catchy, Monkey‘, and I doubt very much that they have seen the last of this amazing women.
On July 18th 2010 it was announced by The Independent newspaper that Ms Mellor had been recruited by the General Medical Council to be part of a group of experts offering guidance to doctors on child protection procedures. In the article by Nina Lakhanni called – Child abduction conspirator hired to advise doctors she wrote:-
A row has broken out after the General Medical Council recruited a woman convicted of conspiracy to abduct a child on to an expert group charged with producing child protection guidance for doctors.
Penny Mellor, from Wolverhampton, served eight months of an 18-month jail sentence after being found guilty of a “wicked conspiracy to abduct” a little girl in 1999. She still maintains she was trying to prevent the child from falling into the hands of social services. Mrs Mellor has been involved in more than 50 complaints against professionals working in child protection, accusing numerous doctors and nurses of misconduct.
The GMC was last night under growing criticism from respected paediatricians, just months after winning widespread praise for setting up the group.
This followed controversy involving a paediatrician, Dr David Southall, an expert on a condition formerly known as M√ľnchhausen syndrome by proxy, in which a person causes injury or illness to another (often their child) to gain attention. Mrs Mellor, who describes herself as a campaigner and medico-legal researcher, has confirmed taking part in around 30 complaints against Dr Southall. The GMC had ruled that he be struck off the medical register but he successfully overturned this at appeal. Mrs Mellor has been investigated, but not charged, for criminal harassment against Dr Southall”.
On 26th July 2010 Ms Blakemore-Brown had this about the to say about the GMC and Ms Mellor in and article entitled  Ms Penny Mellor, The BMJ, The GMC And – The One Click Group – News …
I am no longer astonished about what happens in the country within the so called Regulatory bodies and in the world of so called Child Protection
She continued-
“Ms Mellor seemed hell bent on making sure she was seen to be the only voice for the parents, and any other attempts by others were thwarted. To this day I don’t know why, though clues may lie in the fact that she publicly defended Sir Roy Meadow when it was discovered through FOI that he had been on the Adverse Reactions to Vaccination and Immunisation sub committee of the JCVI. A leading journalist, who, like many others, had been shocked by the Sally Clark case, began to put two and two together – was MSBP a cover up for vaccination adverse reactions and maybe other iatrogenic damage? If so, why would a “housewife” claiming to be on the side of falsely accused parents (many of whom had children whose illnesses began after a vaccine) want to deny that possibility just as Sir Roy himself did in the Clark case? Why is it NEVER considered as part of the differential diagnosis? Who was she protecting? It wasn’t the children who reacted to vaccine whose parents were destroyed by false allegations of MSBP.
Penny Mellor even sent in a vexatious complaint about me, in her many long years of efforts to sabotage whatever I did in relation to MSBP. She sent in a scribbled page to my Regulatory body saying I was not fit to practise – implying mental illness – because she thought that I had said that she had a personality disorder. My own Regulatory body, The British Psychological Society, were only too happy to listen to Ms Mellor and push this complaint through over many years when even their own adjudicator said it was vexatious and should be thrown out. I eventually won, but the damage was considerable. Who influenced them?”
Who indeed, Penny Mellor perhaps?
I have since discovered that shortly before the Director of Brunel University was asked to retire, the University had in fact received funding from GSK.
Since writing this article Ms Mellor resigned from the GMC. In an article covering the story in the BMJ Doctors’ critic resigns from guidance group after protests Clair Dyer had this to say:-
The controversial parents’ advocate and campaigner Penny Mellor has stepped down from the General Medical Council’s expert group on child protection in the face of a High Court challenge to the GMC’s decision to recruit her to the group.
Papers served on the GMC by the paediatrician David Southall argue that her inclusion in the group is “illegal, perverse, and unethical” and contrary to the public interest and the spirit of the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006.
Dr Southall also contends that Mrs Mellor’s appointment is contrary to the GMC’s obligations in respecting the professional status and work of the doctors it registers and contrary to its role, as established with the Charity Commission, to regulate professional practice and provide advice on standards of conduct and performance and on medical ethics.”
PACA Professionals Against Child Abuse had this to say:-
“PACA welcomes the resignation of Mrs Penny Mellor from the expert group set up by the GMC to review doctors’ conduct in child protection matters. Mrs Mellor has led a long-standing campaign against professionals who take a lead in complex and life-threatening child abuse, including paediatricians, pathologists, radiologists and social workers. She has spun a series of false allegations that have impacted on the lives of professionals, as well as the resources of the NHS and GMC, and not least continues to post confidential material concerning families involved in child protection proceedings on public web sites.”
Many professionals have had their careers ruined through speaking out about the dangers of vaccines. Few however have had to endure the years of victimisation that Ms Blakemore-Brown has had to go through. In my opinion this has been a well engineered campaign to destroy the career of a brave child advocate and dedicated professional.
All documents and references cited in this article can be found in full under Lisa Blakemore-Brown. Many of these documents can be found nowhere else on the Internet.
Other research used

The David Southall Film Clip. For the full catalogue, see here

Reading Ms Blakemore-Brown’s book, Reweaving the Autistic Tapestry, which can now finally be purchased on Amazon. The book however has strangely been edited and not by Ms Blakemore-Brown and is now minus the recommendation from Earl Howe on the back cover.
Conversations with Ms Blakemore-Brown

Author Information:

Christina England

I am a UK journalist with an HND in journalism. I am also a member of ICAP International Coalition of Advocates for the People
I have an interest in Human Right issues, especially the rights of the disabled and the elderly.
I wish to expose the new evidence that is being uncovered surrounding vaccines.
Many vaccines have been proven to have serious adverse reactions that have been found to cause, Autism, ADHD and other neurological and physical disorders.
I believe that all parents have the right to the information often hidden by the pharmaceutical industries about what vaccines contain and the often devastating side effects that these vaccines have been found to cause.
It is only when a parent has the full facts that they can make a fully informed choice as to whether they wish to have their child vaccinated or not.
Parents also need to know that there are other choices open to them like single vaccines, mercury free vaccines, homeopathic vaccines and diets to boost the immune system to promote good healthy living.
Our children must not become human pin cushions or profit making machines, they are precious and they are ours.
Christina England

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

AIDS-Like Disease in Vaccine Trial Area

AIDS-Like Disease Mysteriously Appears Where Merck Conducted Vaccine Trials
Tuesday, August 28, 2012 9:52
Aug 28th, 20120 Comment

Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
August 28, 2012

In Southeast Asia, specifically Thailand, an AIDS-like “virus” has been found in people that are not infected with HIV. Those infected have their immune-system compromised. Health officials say that this new AIDS “virus” is not contagious, which begs the question: how did these people come down with this new strain of AIDS?
This infection does not spread the same as AIDS does, according to Dr. Sarah Browne, scientist with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Browne led the team of researchers in Thailand and Taiwan where the disease made its first appearance.
The disease appears to be directed at people of Asian descent; even those living in the US.
Browne has concluded that the new AIDS causes those infected to produce autoantibodies that block interferon-gamma, a chemical signal that assists the human body in fighting infections. The new AIDS targets this chemical and leaves the victim unable to fight off any infection – leaving the person vulnerable to developing deadly sicknesses from even the common cold.
Browne is touting this new AIDS as “adult-onset” because “we do not know what’s causing [people] to make these antibodies.”
In 1962, the US Senate received a report concerning chemical and biological warfare. This is the government contract where HIV-like and Ebola-like viruses were bio-engineered by the US military and the bioweapons contracting lab Biomedics. They were producing viral cancer in monkeys that could then be used through genetic engineering to infect humans.
Robert Gallo, working with the National Cancer Institute, was part of this project. Millions of people are dying from this US sponsored government project to depopulate certain groups of people because of their ethnic heritage; and the US Congress knew about it, and endorsed its use.
Scientific teams from various institutions like the Scripps Research Institute, the Rockefeller University, NIAID’s Vaccine Research Center and Duke University are closely following how they can use the human body’s immune system against the array of HIV strains that keep popping up.
In the sub-Saharan region of Africa, drug resistant forms of HIV are being found which leave current treatments ineffective.
HIV vaccine trials conducted by Merck in 2007 actually made those who took the vaccine more susceptible to the disease. Then in 2009, human experiments in Thailand pointed to drug corporations toward a powerful vaccine that utilized immune system generated anti-bodies as the answer to their dilemma.
New vaccines focus on tricking the human body to reject the HIV/AIDS virus by manipulating the immune system. This mutation is suspected to be able to assist the human body in identifying and neutralizing the virus.
The pharmaceutical giant Merck, along with the US Military HIV Research Program has been attempting to pioneer the HIV vaccine industry with trials in 2007. This has prompted the study into the human immune system and how to effectively manipulate its functions.
Merck are returning to Thailand and the scene of their human experiments in 2007 to trial study a new HIV immunization that will combine two separate vaccines. Johnson&Johnson are joining with Merck, the National Institutes of Medicine and other bio-technological corporations that specialize in researching the viral effects of genetically engineered viruses on the human and animal immune system.
With funding from the Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, National Institutes of Health and the European Union, HIV research and studies into vaccines will be able to have assistance from groups like the Global HIV Vaccine Enterprise.
According to an annual volume of the Special Cancer Virus Program , human experimentation with cancer-causing and immunosuppressive viruses is essential.
Susanne Posel
Occupy Corporatism
August 28, 2012

Homeopathy: The Bhaba Atomic Research Centre Study

 2011 Aug;17(8):705-10.

An exploratory study on scientific investigations in homeopathy using medical analyzer.


Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, CCRH, Mumbai, India.



The action of homeopathic medicines, in ultra-high dilution, is not directly observable. An attempt was made to explore autonomic response of selective homeopathic medicines, in healthy persons, using Medical Analyzer System (Electronics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India).


The objective of the study was to observe the action of homeopathic medicines on physiologic variability of heart rate and blood flow.


Pre- and postinterventional variability spectra of heart rate and blood flow of 77 subjects were recorded with the Medical Analyzer System, administering homeopathic preparations of Aconitum napellus (6c, 10M), Arsenicum album (200c, 1M), Gelsemium sempervirens (200c, 1M), Phosphorus (200c, 1M), Pulsatilla nigricans (200c) and Sulphur (200c, 1M) versus placebo control. The amplitude of the peaks viz. low-frequency, medium-frequency, and high-frequency was measured for postintervention analysis. An increase in the amplitude of any valid peak by 100% or a decrease by 50% was considered as significant change.


Aconitum napellus produced a response in heart rate variability (HRV) with 30c potency and in blood flow variability with 1M potency. Sulphur 200c and 1M, Gelsemium 200c and Pulsatilla 200c, produced a 62.5% response in HRV against the placebo response of 16.6%. Gelsemium, Phosphorus, and Sulphur produced a response in blood flow variability with a 1M potency, similar to the response of Aconitum napellus 1M.


These data suggest that it is possible to record the response of homeopathic medicines on physiologic parameters of the autonomic nervous system.

Comment in

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

More news here:

‘Medical Analyzer’ Proves Potentized Drugs ‘Works’- But The Real Question Is ‘How Homeopathy Works’.

1 Vote

Research has been reported to have done and still going on at BARC and TATA INSTITUTE OF RESEARCH,  about how different strengths of different medicines produces different changes in our body, and also how same potency of different medicine produces different impressions . A prominent section of homeopathic community enthusiastically celebrate this study as a ‘great fundamental research’ in homeopathy. Some of them even claim “this study has resolved all the riddles of homeopathy scientifically”.
Even though this study is useful in proving that homeopathic potentized drugs really work by observing the changes happening in physiological values, it no way help us to prove what is actually happening during potentization, what is the exact active principles contained in potentized drugs or, what is the mechanism of molecular processes involved in homeopathic therapeutics. They only answer the question “does homeopathy works?” But they do not answer the basic question “how homeopathy works”.
Media reported as follows: BARC Medical Analyzer to enable objective study of homoeopathy
“Mumbai: Use of Medical Analyser developed by Bhabha Atomic Research Centre has shown that it would enable a better understanding of the selective action of homoeopathic medicines in different strengths on human beings.
Researches done by BARC, Regional Research Institute of Central Council for Research in homoeopathy, Mumbai, National Institute of Homoeopathy, Kolkata and Fr Muller Homoeopathic Medical College (FMHMC), Mangalore have indicated potential use of physiological variability in fundamental research in homoeopathy.
“The data reveals the selective action of homoeopathic medicines in different potencies especially in Heart Rate Variability (HRV), Blood Flow Variability (BFV) and Morphology Index Variability (MIV),” Dr Srinath Rao of FMHMC said during the Meeting on Advanced applications of Physiological variability held at BARC here last week.
Homoeopathy medicines beyond 12th potency do not contain even a single atom or molecule of the medicinal substance. Yet these medicines are effective in the treatment of large number of diseases and particularly the ones that are considered incurable in modern medicine.
Electronic division of BARC has been actively working on this aspect of homoeopathic medicines for the past three decades and their initial experiments with potencised medicines have recorded 50 to 150 per cent increase in the blood flow in affected parts of the body within 30 minutes of the indicated medicine in variety of patients, Rao said in his paper on `Fundamental Research in Homoeopathy: Experiments with SULPHUR` presented at the Meet.
“The reproducibility of these experiments largely depended upon the choice of indicated medicine, which was determined subjectively,” Rao said.
But with the development of Medical Analyser, BARC scientists, headed by J D Jindal, have shown that physiological variability show change in the spectrum caused by randomly selected potentised medicine and randomly selected control subjects (volunteers) in 2004 and “this opened the door to us for using physiological variability in the field of homoeopathy,” Rao said.
“We used in our experiments with SULPHUR, Anu Photo Rheograph developed by BARC which is based on the principles of Photo Plethysmography also developed by it,” Rao said.
Dr Nirupama Mishra and colleagues from National Institute of Homoeopathy, C Nayak from the Department of AYUSH along with other private doctors carried out an exploratory scientific trial on 72 healthy volunteers, studied different potencies of Aconitum Napellus and Nux Vomica with the placebo control.
Homoeopathy is one of the leading alternative systems of medicine worldwide introduced by Dr Samuel Christian Hahnemann (1755-1843). Since its introduction to the mankind, its basic principles have not changed as homoeopathy is primarily a specialised system of rational therapy based on fixed and definite laws of nature.
Homoeopathy has been mired in controversy due to its concept of drug dynamisation leading to ultra diluted form of medicines. “Since these kinds of medicines do not come under any measurable pharmacological standards, the attention of scientific fraternity has been focused on this apparent lack of existence of material substance in homoeopathic medicine and to its potency concept in the light of Avogadro`s law, rather than on its effectiveness,” Mishra said.
Both Rao and Mishra pointed out that it was necessary that more medicines and potencies are to be investigated with this scientific tool for the welfare of the humanity.”
BARC develops new medical instruments:
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) has developed a host of new generation medical instruments opening fresh dimensions to understand health care.
The approach of medical practitioners will now be more objective in terms of diagnosis and action of different drugs on human body, said BARC officials.
“Mobile ECG, Plethysmograph, Peripheral Pulse Analyser (3-channel), Tele Stress monitor, and Intent Detection System are few technologies BARC has developed. Many of these have been transferred to manufacturers,” said BARC director RK Sinha at a two-day meet on ‘Advanced Applications of Physiological Variability’ organised by the Electronics Division.
The Electronic Division began development work in the field of Physiological Variability in active collaboration with city’sGrantMedicalCollegeand the JJ Hospital, All India Institute of  Medical Sciences (New Delhi),FatherMullerMedicalCollege(Mangalore), among others.
“These instruments, which have been tried and tested, have proved that even the Science of Homeopathy, Ayurveda and their effectiveness can be understood objectively,” Sinha said.
What is BARC Medical Analyzer Software?
Variability is the sign of life; therefore higher variability in physiological parameters is generally an indicator of better health. The use of variability for the diagnosis of several diseases is age old. Because of great potential of this technique, heart rate variability monitoring is a routine feature in the patient monitoring systems available in the market for employment in intensive care units and intensive cardiac care units. Bhabha Atomic Research Centre has integrated cardiac output, stroke volume/peripheral blood flow variability; with heart rate variability for the study of these changes in variety of diseases in a PC based Software developed called Medical Analyser. It has unique feature that it yields heart rate variability, cardiac output variability, stroke volume variability / peripheral blood flow variability from a single data acquisition session from the patient when used with Impedance Cardiovasograph hardware. The data acquisition is controlled by the PC, serially connected to the acquisition unit. The variability analysis and transfer to database is performed by the PC with the help of user-friendly software.
Principle: Short term analysis of variations in a physiological
parameter in time and frequency domain
Parameters (Hardware dependent): Heart Rate, Stroke Volume, Cardiac Output, Peripheral Blood Flow with Impedance Cardiovasograph and Heart Rate, Peripheral Blood Flow with Oxygen Saturation Monitor
Method of Analysis: Fast Fourier Transform
Barc Medical analyzer enables homeopathic researchers to observe the changes in  physiological values such as Heart Rate Variability (HRV), Blood Flow Variability (BFV) and Morphology Index Variability (MIV) caused by administration of potentized homeopathic drugs. It is a great achievement, since it provides objective evidence that potentized drugs are capable of producing some sort of responses in the human organism. That proves ‘homeopathy works’!
As Dr. Rao has reported to have confessed,  ‘the reproducibility of these experiments largely depended upon the choice of indicated medicine, which was determined subjectively”. This inconsistency in ‘reproducibility of results’  attributed to the ‘subjectivity’ factor  is the greatest limitation of ‘medical analyzer study’ of homeopathic drugs. That means, if  our selection of similimum was not exact, or the potency of drug used was not genuine, we may fail in producing expected results. Such multiple variables make this study unreliable in reaching any clear conclusions. When we fail to produce results, we cannot say whether it was due to wrong selection of similimum, or due to the use of  wrongly potentized or wrongly labeled drugs, which are not so uncommon in homeopathic drug industry.
Even though this study is useful in proving that homeopathic potentized drugs really work by observing the changes happening in physiological values, it no way help us to prove what is actually happening during potentization, what is the exact active principles contained in potentized drugs or, what is the mechanism of molecular processes involved in homeopathic therapeutics. They only answer the question “does homeopathy works?” But they do not answer the basic question “how homeopathy works”.
Any fundamental research in homeopathy should provide answers to three vital questions.
1. What happens during potentization?
2. What is the exact active principles contained in potentized drugs?
3. What is the exact molecular mechanism by which these active principles act up on the organism therapeutically?
Unless a research could not help in addressing these three basic questions, it cannot be considered a ‘fundamental research in homeopathy’. Hence, studies conducted using Barc Medical Analyzer cannot be called ‘fundamental research in homeopathy’. Such baseless claims would give wrong messages to the community.
Did the researches really address these three vital questions? If  ’yes’, what are their answers?
My answer to these basic questions:
1. Potentization involves the process of ‘molecular imprinting’.
2. Active priniciples of potentized drugs are ‘molecular imprints’ of constituent molecules of drugs used for potentization.
3. These ‘molecular imprints’ act as artificial binding sites for pathogenic molecules, and relieves biological molecules from pathologic molecular inhibitions.
I would like to know the comments of  ’fundamental researchers’ on these concepts I am putting forward.
We all know after 12c drugs does not contains any molecules. We all know our potentized drugs really intervene the biochemical process of living organism, and rectify pathological molecular errors.
HOW HOMEOPATHY WORKS?  Answering this question should be the agenda of any ‘fundamental’ research project in homeopathy. That is the FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION of homeopathy now.