by David Gutierrez

(NaturalNews) The number of serious injuries and deaths linked to the use of prescription medications reached a new high in the first quarter of 2008, according to a report issued by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices.

Researchers found mention of 4,825 deaths and approximately 21,000 serious injuries among voluntary adverse event reports submitted by doctors to the FDA between January and March. These numbers were 38 percent higher than the quarterly average for 2007 and a striking 200 percent higher than the first quarter of 2007.

The researchers estimate that because adverse event reports are voluntary, the numbers represent less than one-tenth of the actual prescription drug-related injuries and deaths taking place.

Together, 10 drugs were responsible for killing more than 100 people each, thereby accounting for more than 20 percent of all deaths. This contrasted with prior quarters studied, in which only one to three drugs killed that many people.

The two single most lethal drugs were the anti-smoking drug varenicline — marketed as Chantix — and the blood thinner heparin. While heparin was responsible for killing a 102 people and injuring 779, the vast majority of these cases were associated with a batch of contaminated medication imported from China. Since the discovery of the tainted drugs, injuries and deaths from heparin have dropped off.

Chantix, in contrast, continues to cause high rates of injury and deaths, accounting for 50 fatalities and 1,001 serious injuries in the first quarter of the year. Since its approval in 2006, the drug has been implicated in 112 fatalities and 3,325 serious injuries. Many of these injuries were self-inflicted and stemmed from the drug's psychiatric side effects, while others stemmed from seizures, blackouts, loss of consciousness and sudden heart arrhythmia.

Other drugs in the top 10 included the common over-the-counter painkillers acetaminophen and ibuprofen, as well as prescription pain killers and narcotics.

Related article Death By Medicine

by David Gutierrez

(NaturalNews) The notorious drug thalidomide, which produced birth defects in the children of women who were prescribed it as a treatment for morning sickness, appears to have been developed by Nazi concentration camp doctors as a nerve gas antidote.

"It is now appearing increasingly likely that thalidomide was the last war crime of the Nazis," said Martin Johnson, director of the Thalidomide Trust and author of one of the papers.

Thalidomide, marketed between 1957 and 1961 by the German company Chemie Grünenthal, caused women to give birth to children with developmental deformities including brain damage and malformed arms, legs, hands and feet. Grünenthal has always claimed that its scientists developed the drug independently while searching for a new antihistamine formula, and the German government has consistently refused to compensate any victims without German citizenship.

An estimated 6,000 thalidomide victims are still alive, many of whom have never received financial compensation.

Among the new evidence presented by Johnson is an internal document proving that
Grünenthal purchased the trade name for thalidomide (Contergan) from Rhône-Poulenc, a French company controlled by the Nazis during World War II. Johnson notes that Rhône-Poulenc registered 14 chemically similar drugs after 1942 ending in the unique suffix "-ergan," and that thalidomide falls easily into that category.

"Not only is the name typical of the Rhône-Poulenc brand names of the 1940s; the action of thalidomide also belongs among this range of products," the report reads.

Johnson further notes that Grünenthal's 1954 patent on the drug implied that human trials had already been carried out, but no documentation was provided of those trials.

"The patents suggest that thalidomide was probably one of a number of products developed at [the chemical laboratory] Dyhernfurth or Auschwitz-Monowitz under the leadership of Otto Ambros in the course of nerve gas research."

This claim is supported by evidence unearthed by Carlos De Napoli for his forthcoming book on the Nazi scientists. De Napoli has uncovered a 1944 memo from an IG Farben executive to Hitler's personal doctor, referencing the development of a chemical with the exact same formula as thalidomide.

"There is absolutely no doubt of the Nazi development of and experimentation with thalidomide in the World War Two camps," De Napoli said.

by David Gutierrez

(NaturalNews) More than one-third of patients receiving injected medication in the intensive care unit of a hospital may experience an error, according to a study conducted by researchers from Rudolfstiftung Hospital in Austria and published in the British Medical Journal.

"It is a really serious problem," lead researcher Andreas Valentin said. "The administration of injected medication is a weak point in patient safety."

The researchers examined 1,300 patients receiving injected medication in one of 113 intensive care units in 27 countries over the course of one 24-hour period. They found that 441 patients, or 34 percent, experienced at least one error in the administration of their medication. Nearly half of these experienced more than one error in the study period. Seven patients suffered severe harm from the errors, and in five cases the errors contributed to a patient's death.

The most common errors involved medication being given at incorrect times, or a scheduled dose not being given at all. Other errors included incorrect dosages or administration of the wrong drug altogether. A full 69 percent of the errors occurred during routine, rather than emergency, care.

Among the drugs involved were insulin, blood thinners and sedatives.

Medical staff attributed one-third of the errors, in part, to stress and tiredness. Other factors leading to errors included recent changes to the names of drugs, failure to follow hospital protocol and poor communication between staff members.

Responding to the study, the Intensive Care Society called for improved training and protocols to reduce the error rate in high-stress medical settings.

"The urgency of treatment can … mean that these drugs have to be located rapidly, prepared efficiently and administered quickly to prevent further deterioration," the group said. "Unfortunately, this pressure does mean that the combined total incident rate is almost inevitably higher than in care areas where fewer medicines are required."

Valentin agreed that changes to hospital procedure could significantly reduce error rates.

"With the increasing complexity of care in critically ill patients, organizational factors such as error reporting systems and routine checks at shift changes can reduce the risk of such errors," he said.

Sources for this story include: news.bbc.co.uk.

Related article Death By Medicine

For the past six months I have watched various people convert their automobile cooling systems from 134a refrigerant to Duracool 12a with what I would call fairly dramatic results. When cool air output is measured before conversion and then after conversion; the results I’ve seen have ranged from an 8-11 degree drop in cool air output. I finally decided to make the switch myself along with four other friends and a family member. I contacted a friend who is a Duracool distributor and the five of us had a ‘refrigerant changing party’ on six vehicles, which included both my car and my pickup.

Of the six, one of them had an 8 degree temperature drop, 2 others had a 10 degree drop, and my car had an 11 degree drop before and after Duracool . One vehicle had a slow leak over the winter and was totally depleted so we couldn’t measure it and we forgot to measure another. It works equally well in any vehicle. The vehicles converted were a Nissan 4×4, a Lincoln LS, a Lexus, a 20 year old Ford pickup, a Nissan Titan, and an older model Toyota.

Since that time we at Utopia Silver have been considering selling the Duracool line of products, and last week we decided to do so. The advantages of these products are simply too many to ignore. The refrigerant used in most vehicles in the USA, 134a, auto-ignites at approx. 1300 degrees; for Duracool it is over 1600 degrees. The colder air output of Duracool and more efficient cooling require less compressor running and therefore saves on gasoline. The molecules of Duracool are over 3½ times larger than 134a, reducing the chance of costly leaks. Additionally, Duracool doesn't deteriorate compressor and cooling system parts as does 134a, extending the life of your unit and making future repairs less frequent. Duracool is more environmentally friendly and non-toxic; unlike 134a which can cause cardiac arrest if breathed.

You may first want to find an automobile A/C man who will either order the Duracool for you or who will allow you to provide your own coolant. The old 134a needs to be evacuated from your system before recharging it with Duracool. If you have a system that has already leaked out due to a small, slow leak, you may want to use the Duracool DuraDry to remove the moisture in the system and then add Duracool System Seal to reseal the leak. Consult an A/C technician to determine whether or not this is feasible. If you decide that the leak is not too bad and is repairable, then you can add the Duracool 12a. If you are interested in these products, please go to the Duracool page to order.

Ben Taylor

Silver Bullet-in Readers and Utopia Silver Customers,

Below is a 'press release' from a fledgling natural health and current events magazine put together by my friends, Sarah, Andrea, and Thomas that has many relevant and interesting articles.

Please note, Sarah Cain is the best 18 year old writer on the Internet.

To read an interview they did with me in a past issue, go to, http://naturallygoodmagazine.com/archive/naturally_good_magazine_issue_2.pdf

Please check them out and let me know what you think.

Ben Taylor
Silver Bullet-in Publisher

***
Past Issues of Naturally Good Magazine Available Free!

Naturally Good Magazine is a revolutionary new magazine which covers health-related topics, ranging from pharmaceutical-induced school shootings to the treatments for strep throat.  We cover the articles that other health magazines are afraid to, out of fear of the F.D.A..  We routinely exercise our right to freedom of the press, as guaranteed to us by the United States Constitution.  We do not use anonymous sources, and we stake our names and reputations to our words, and never hesitate to sign our names.  We offer old-fashioned investigative journalism that was lost amid a new trend of misinformation, pandering to corporate agendas, and deceit.  All of our pages include well-researched material, because our credibility and your trust are important to us.

We teach our readers about good nutrition, maintaining their own health, preventing and curing disease, detoxing, and cooking naturally; all with God's medicines.  We place your health above big industries, money, and even the government.  We guarantee that we will always be completely honest, because we have nothing to gain from lying to you.  We are a different kind of publication and a rarity kind in the printed media.  Most retailers refuse to carry Naturally Good Magazine, because it is not merely an advertisement delivery system, but it covers real content that can save lives.  It threatens an entire industry which keeps people sick for profit.

The print version of Naturally Good Magazine is currently only available at select Earth Fare stores in North Carolina, but past issues are always released online, free of charge in PDF format.  We are far more concerned about saving lives, than intellectual property rights; and so we encourage redistribution of Naturally Good Magazine.  It is one of many things that make Naturally Good Magazine different from others. 

It is our aim to save the lives of anyone who will listen.  The medical establishment is the number one killer in the United States today, through their use of pharmaceuticals and unnecessary surgeries.  Allopathic medicine has never actually been intended to cure disease; but instead, it merely treats disease symptoms.  Its drugs manage disease symptoms, which thereby allows for the management of patients as perpetual customers, so chronic sickness becomes normal, and a tool of wealth acquisition.  They profit only when you are sick, and it is not in their financial interest to cure any condition.

There are cheap and truly safe remedies for even the worst chronic conditions; including cancer, diabetes, and heart-disease.  You have been prevented from knowing this, because the cures use all-natural methods, which are not patentable, profitable, and cannot be easily regulated (for monopolizing a market).  Naturally Good Magazine will provide you with something that you are not used to hearing: the truth.  We hope that you can handle it.

Read Naturally Good Magazine now: http://NaturallyGoodMagazine.com/past_issues.shtml

by Mike Adams

(NaturalNews) Of all the hare-brained ideas about climate change I've heard in the last few years, this one takes the grand prize: John Holdren, the new science advisor to President Obama, is actively considering radical geoengineering ideas in order to halt global warming. One such idea now being discussed with the Obama administration involves — get this — launching enormous amounts of pollution particles into Earth's upper atmosphere to block the sun's rays and "chill" the planet.

Let me explain why this is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. And keep in mind this is not about the debate of whether global warming is even real or not, since that's a different article altogether. This is about the short-sighted stupidity of even considering polluting the atmosphere in order to protect us from the CO2 pollution we've already dumped into the atmosphere.

First off, there's the whole idea that intentionally launching pollution into the atmosphere is, by any reckoning, a dangerous ecological experiment that potentially puts the entire Earth ecosystem at risk. Let's face it, folks: Human beings have proven themselves to be remarkably bad at anticipating the ecological effects of their own actions. The ramifications of such misguided efforts to fight global warming simply cannot be foreseen by any scientist (or group of scientists).

On top of that, human scientists have demonstrated themselves to be astonishingly arrogant when it comes to dealing with Mother Nature. The idea that we can save the planet by polluting the atmosphere is reckless at best, and delusional at worst.

Secondly, suppose blocking out one percent (or so) of the sunlight actually does halt global warming… then what? If the scheme somehow works, it will teach human beings that controlling CO2 emissions isn't necessary at all, because no matter how bad the pollution gets, governments can always launch more particles into the atmosphere to dim the sun and make up for it.

This could result in a vicious cycle of atmospheric dimming, followed by yet more CO2 emissions, followed by yet more dimming, and so on until the whole planet is left suffocating in a literal haze of pollution. The root of the problem, meanwhile, will remain completely ignored: CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants, automobiles and other fossil fuel burners.

In fact, this whole idea of dimming the sun instead of reducing CO2 emissions is a classic example of the kind of "treat the symptom" stupidity that characterizes western medicine. Instead of showing a cancer patient how to heal their own cancer, western medical doctors poison the patient with chemotherapy. This is essentially what the "global dimming" idea entails: Poisoning the planet with yet more pollution while calling it a "solution."

It's all quite ridiculous. More pollution will not save the planet any better than more poison saves cancer patients.

But there's a third reason why dimming the sun with atmospheric pollution is a really, really bad idea: Virtually every living creature or system on our planet depends on sunlight for its biological energy. This is true even of humans: We're not solar-powered (unless you're a breatharian), but we do depend on foods that are derived from solar-powered plants at the bottom of the food chain.

This is true on land and in the oceans: Sunlight is the primary energy source for virtually ALL life on our planet. So what happens to life on Earth, exactly, when you start dimming out the sun using some hare-brained global pollution initiative?

Well one obvious thing that might interest anyone who eats food is that changes in sunlight density will alter crop yields. It's not just about the total sunlight reaching the crops, either: It's also about the seasonal sensitivity of crops.

Plants are more intelligent than most people think, you see. Plants actually monitor sunlight and they measure the number of hours of sunlight present during the day as well as changes in sunlight density. Based on this data, plants then decide when to flower, when to produce more seeds (grains) or fruits, when to shift caloric energy into growth spurts and when to die off. If you start mucking around with the sunlight, you're going to throw off the timing calculations of virtually all the plants on the entire planet, including food crops. And that could mean planet-wide crop failures.

Given that most of the population on our planet is just a few weeks away from mass starvation, all it takes is one season of crop failures to wipe out as much as 90% of the human population on our planet.

This may be no coincidence, of course. If some evil genius scientist (Dr. Evil?) wanted to destroy 90% of the human population, polluting the atmosphere and dimming the sun for a year or two would be a very effective way to accomplish that.

How do I know it's effective?

Because Mother Nature already demonstrated this nearly two hundred years ago…

1816 is known in the western world as the "year without a summer" because of the eruption of a massive volcano named Tambora located in modern-day Indonesia. The amount of particulate matter ejected into the atmosphere by the volcano dimmed the sun across much of the world and chilled the summer temperatures so drastically that to this day, the year 1816 is called "Eighteen hundred and froze to death." (http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen/…)

That year, a record-keeping meteorologist named Edward Holyoke recorded this entry on June 7 (which should be summer): "…exceeding[ly] cold. Ground frozen hard, and squalls of snow through the day. Icicles 12 inches long in the shade at noon day."

A poem from that year reads,

The trees were all leafless, the mountains were brown
The face of the country was scathed with a frown
And bleak were the hills, and the foliage sere
As had never been seen at that time of the year.

You can read more about the Summer of 1816 at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_W…

Without question, the eruption of Tambora dimmed the sun and chilled the planet. Modern-day scientists concerned about global warming might call this a "success" (if they only look at the symptoms and not the whole patient). But at what cost? How many people, animals and plants died in 1816 as a result of this particulate matter being ejected into the atmosphere? And why on Earth (literally) would modern-day scientists wish to recreate such a catastrophe on purpose?

The fact that volcanic eruptions eject huge amounts of particulate matter into the atmosphere and dim the sun may, in fact, make volcanoes a target for exploitation by mad scientists looking to dim the sun. It's a pretty simple scheme, actually: Find a volcano that's about to blow, drop a nuke into it, then set it off and hope for the best.

Anyone looking to set off a volcano would be immediately drawn to just one sleeping giant of a volcano… the largest volcano in the world, and one that's already 20,000 years or so behind schedule for a major eruption.

Which volcano am I referring to? Yellowstone National Park, of course.

Huh? I can hear people saying right now: "There's no volcano in Yellowstone National Park!"

Okay, you're right: There's no volcano there. In technical terms, it's a SUPER volcano!

Yellowstone National Park sits on top of a unique caldera containing a combination of pressures and gasses that make it the single most dangerous active volcano in the world. So why is there no mountain on top of the volcano? The answer may surprise you: Because it blows itself away with each eruption!

Learn more about the Yellowstone SUPER volcano here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/…

or watch this shocking YouTube video here: (really shocking, trust me) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh9z…

or read this book called SUPER Volcano: The Ticking Time Bomb Beneath Yellowstone National Park: http://www.nationalparkstraveler.co…

Now why is all this important?

Pay attention, Earthlings. Here comes the scary part…

The Yellowstone super volcano is a special kind of volcano. It's not the usual kind where deep pressure force molten lava to the surface. Instead, the Yellowstone super volcano is a special kind of highly-pressurized gas chamber with a lid on top (the lid being the ground). If the lid comes off, the pressure drops and the gasses start to rapidly expand in a runaway explosion that dwarfs typical volcanoes.

As explained on Wikipedia: "The volcanic eruptions, as well as the continuing geothermal activity, are a result of a large chamber of magma located below the caldera's surface. The magma in this chamber contains gases that are kept dissolved only by the immense pressure that the magma is under. If the pressure is released to a sufficient degree by some geological shift, then some of the gases bubble out and cause the magma to expand. This can cause a runaway reaction. If the expansion results in further relief of pressure, for example, by blowing crust material off the top of the chamber, the result is a very large gas explosion." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow…)

In fact, the term "very large" is an understatement. We're talking about a Biblical event here — something that would cover most of the United States in ash and alter the world climate for years to come.

Here's the scary part: Arrogant scientists could conceivably nuke Yellowstone National Park to blow the lid off the super volcano there, causing a massive eruption that would accomplish their goal of "global dimming" by ejecting many megatons of particular matter into the atmosphere. And God knows far too many modern-day scientists are stupid and arrogant enough to try something like this. One nuke is all it would take, and it's a whole lot cheaper (and faster) than launching matter into the atmosphere the old-fashioned way (with rockets). Why not let Mother Nature do the job for you?

One carefully-placed nuke could set off the Yellowstone super volcano chain reaction of rapid gas expansion, making the entire caldera go ballistic in a gigantic volcanic explosion that the planet hasn't seen for 600,000 years (or so).

The best part of this evil plan, of course, is that the whole thing can be done covertly. Simply bury a nuke in Yellowstone National Park and set it off without any warning whatsoever. If anyone asks, just blame it on Acts of God. With the sun dimmed for an entire growing season, not only will global warming be halted, but a global population reduction of billions of people will also likely be achieved, killing two birds with one stone (from the twisted point of view of mad geoengineering scientists and population reduction schemers).

I mean, come on: It's no longer even a secret that world governments are trying to reduce the world population. It's only a matter of HOW it's going to be done. One Yellowstone eruption takes care of the whole population problem in one growing season. If such an event does occur, by the way, the safest place the live will be near the equator and far from Yellowstone. South America looks really good at the moment…

By the way, I don't have any hard evidence that the U.S. government is looking to nuke Yellowstone in order to accomplish this "global dimming" objective (combined with a population reduction agenda), but the government is talking about radical geoengineering ideas that fit into the same category. Nuking Yellowstone National Park is a cheap, effective way to depopulate the planet and halt global warming while blaming the whole thing on Mother Nature. It's the perfect ecological crime.

If you notice people in radiation suits drilling in Yellowstone this summer, you might want to evacuate the area just in case…