New Obama Law Places ‘Soviet-Style’ Capital Controls on Americans
Patrick Henningsen
21st Century Wire
March 31, 2010
Americans’ ability to move their money across international borders may become restricted thanks to new legislation passed last week. Buried within Obama’s recent $17.5 billion “H.I.R.E.” Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (H.R. 2487) is a new U.S. Federal restriction on any foreign holdings which exceed the meager amount of $50,000 and leaves the door open for a new 30% transaction or ‘holdings’ tax to be enforced by the IRS. The new law amounts to an unprecedented extension of the US Government into the global sphere.
Why has the White House and its Federal Government decided passed such a law now? We should start by considering the big picture. The ramifications of this new under-the-radar federal move are large and far-reaching. Concerned readers would do well here to question both the fundamental and practical aspects of such a law. Consider for one moment the letter of the law- or the figure of $50,000. For extremely high net-worth individuals, this new regulation over their personal freedom amounts to a mere ’speed-bump’ in financial terms. With their money buried securely into property, foreign investments and strings of shell companies and complexed funds, financial elites will find this new super socialist state control affects only minor liquid cash amounts, or ‘pocket-money’. For the middle class or small investor, the picture is quite different. Fast-forward 12 or 18 months into the future where rising inflation and a severe devaluation of the dollar may occur. The ability for a middle class American to migrate his or her savings into the relative safe haven of a foreign currency or overseas investment is now controlled by the United States Federal Government.
Economists and historians will note that such “Capital Controls” are part and parcel of super-socialist states like the Soviet Union and its former satellite states. Even today, it’s common practice for struggling socialist governments located in regions like South America, Central America and Africa to impose periodic restrictions on cash leaving those countries- a sure sign of a currency and economy in decline. This practice also characterizes foreign states who are under the economic restructuring administration of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). One could also speculate that such restrictions imposed on Americans would certainly pave the way for a future IMF-type administration of the USA, making it markedly easier to manage for the World Bank.
Putting all speculation aside though, this new law amounts to a dangerous precedent where the Federal Government can, with the full enforcement of the IRS, lay down Capital Controls on any dollar amount- regardless of its size. In the event of a US currency devaluation(see US ‘Bank Holiday’) of the dollar, the said figure in the new bill- $50,000, could become a rather nominal sum amounting to only 2/3’s or 1/3 of it’s previous value. Do not count on the Federal Government to adjust its printed figure of “$50,000″ for inflation or devaluation, leaving a Capital Control on relatively smaller holdings, leaving no safe haven for the average American.
Throughout history, in countries where such Capital Controls are administered by the state, large black market cash courier industries have thrived. When a foreign currency is difficult or illegal for local citizens to acquire, they will either pay a tax to the government or a smaller black market premium to acquire it. If government transaction taxes are high enough(like the new 30% tax set by US law), punters may opt the black market. This certainly was the case in fledgling socialist countries like Italy in the 1960’s
where organized networks of independent couriers amassed large fortunes by smuggling cash over the border. Of course, new border restrictions and TSA surveillance technologies will make it almost impossible for an individual to move substantial amounts of cash through airports. Through color of law, such activities might already be considered illegal and deemed as tax evasion by the IRS. Read a full analysis on Obama’s new law here, courtesy of our friends at Zero Hedge:
It’s Official – America Now Enforces Capital Controls
It couldn’t have happened to a nicer country. On March 18, with very little pomp and circumstance, president Obama passed the most recent stimulus act, the $17.5 billion Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (H.R. 2487), brilliantly goalseeked by the administration’s millionaire cronies to abbreviate as HIRE. As it was merely the latest
in an endless stream of acts destined to expand the government payroll to infinity, nobody cared about it, or actually read it. Because if anyone had read it, the act would have been known as the Capital Controls Act, as one of the lesser, but infinitely more important provisions on page 27, known as Offset Provisions – Subtitle A—Foreign Account Tax Compliance, institutes just that. In brief, the Provision requires that foreign banks not only withhold 30% of all outgoing capital flows (likely remitting the collection promptly back to the US Treasury) but also disclose the full details of non-exempt account-holders to the US and the IRS. And should this provision be deemed illegal by a given foreign nation’s domestic laws (think Switzerland), well the foreign financial institution is required to close the account. It’s the law. If you thought you could move your capital to the non-sequestration safety of non-US financial institutions, sorry you lose – the law now says so. Capital Controls are now here and are now fully enforced by the law.
Let’s parse through the just passed law, which has been mentioned by exactly ZERO mainstream media outlets (HERE).
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Population reduction enthusiast says “a few people with authority” should run the planet
Top Eco-Fascist Calls For End Of Freedom To Fight “Global Warming”
Population reduction enthusiast says “a few people with authority” should run the planet
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010
A renowned environmentalist, known for his advocacy of population reduction as a means of offsetting climate change, has called for “a more authoritative world” where freedom comes second to tackling what he sees as the devastating effects of global warming.
Futurist James Lovelock, tells the London Guardian that he believes “It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while,” in order to save humanity.
“We need a more authoritative world.” Lovelock states.
“We’ve become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It’s all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can’t do that.” the 90 year old proponent of the Gaia hypothesis adds.
“You’ve got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.”
“But it can’t happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What’s the alternative to democracy? There isn’t one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.” Lovelock concludes.
Which “people with authority” could Lovelock have in mind for this tyrannical takeover in the name of mother Earth? Certainly not the disgraced UN affiliated climate scientists, whose involvement in several recent scandals even Lovelock admits is reprehensible:
“Fudging the data in any way whatsoever is quite literally a sin against the holy ghost of science. I’m not religious, but I put it that way because I feel so strongly. It’s the one thing you do not ever do. You’ve got to have standards.” he states in the interview.
Lovelock also has little faith in renewable energies, carbon trading or cap and tax schemes, which he previously told the New Scientist are “verging on a gigantic scam”:
Carbon trading, with its huge government subsidies, is just what finance and industry wanted. It’s not going to do a damn thing about climate change, but it’ll make a lot of money for a lot of people and postpone the moment of reckoning. I am not against renewable energy, but to spoil all the decent countryside in the UK with wind farms is driving me mad. It’s absolutely unnecessary, and it takes 2500 square kilometres to produce a gigawatt – that’s an awful lot of countryside.
Lovelock repeats this sentiment in his latest interview with the Guardian, noting:
I don’t know enough about carbon trading, but I suspect that it is basically a scam. The whole thing is not very sensible. We have this crazy idea that we are setting an example to the world. What we’re doing is trying to make money out of the world by selling them renewable gadgetry and green ideas. It might be worthy from the national interest, but it is moonshine if you think what the Chinese and Indians are doing [in terms of emissions].
So, perhaps Lovelock would point to his friends at The Optimum Population Trust, a notorious UK-based public policy group that campaigns for a gradual decline in the global human population to what it sees as a “sustainable” level.
Lovelock became a patron of the thinktank in 2009. In a statement released by the trust to mark the appointment, Lovelock called on the environmental movement as a whole to “recognise the truth and speak out” on the link between rising human numbers and global warming.
Lovelock said: “Those who fail to see that population growth and climate change are two sides of the same coin are either ignorant or hiding from the truth. These two huge environmental problems are inseparable and to discuss one while ignoring the other is irrational.”
He added: “How can we possibly decrease carbon emissions and land use while the number of emitters and the space they occupy remorselessly increases? When will the environmentalists who claim to be green recognise the truth and speak out?”
So, essentially Dr Lovelock advocates the destruction of freedom in order that an overriding authoritative global power can oversee the radical stemming of the planet’s human population – nice.
Roger Martin, chair of OPT, said of Lovelock’s appointment: “We desperately need to remember that future population growth is not a ‘fact’ to be passively accepted but something over which we have control, and that limiting it could therefore play a major role in curbing emissions. Tragically, the green movement has chosen to forget this. With the help of eminent individuals such as James Lovelock, we will do our best to remind them.”
The OPT also has as patrons controversial primatologist and environmentalist Jane Goodall, who thinks that caging chimps and other apes is better for them than letting them live free in the wild; Professor Aubrey Manning, president of the UK’s Wildlife Trusts; and Sir Crispin Tickell, the ex-diplomat credited with the “greening” of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
The OPT also boasts as a patron BBC darling wildlife broadcaster and film-maker Sir David Attenborough, who has called for a one child policy like that of Communist China to be implemented in Britain. The proposal is one of the OPT’s main initiatives.
The think tank is also home to Jonathon Porritt, former chair of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, one of Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, who has stated that Britain’s population must be cut in half from around 60 million to 30 million if it is to build a sustainable society.
We have exhaustively exposed the nonsense behind the idea that the Earth’s current population levels are exceeding sustainable levels and are contributing to devastating climate change, however, Lovelock and his ilk at the OPT remain in positions of influence.
Lovelock is also an ardent advocate of geoengineering the planet in the name of controlling the climate. In 2007 Lovelock proposed laying vast swathes of pipes under the world’s oceans in order to pump water from the bottom of the seas – rich in nutrients, but mostly dead – to the top. The idea being that the action would encourage algae to breed, absorb more carbon and release more dimethyl sulphide into the atmosphere, a chemical known to seed sunlight reflecting clouds.
Effectively, Lovelock wants to try and block out the sun, the source of all life on this planet – nice.
Lovelock is also a member of The Royal Society of Edinburgh, an organization that has thrown its full weight behind the global warming movement, lending its absolute support for legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 80%, a process that will devastate the global economy and living standards.
This organization has been even more vehement than national governments in its advocacy of the man-made cause of global warming, calling for such drastic CO2 cuts to be made in the short term, not even by the usual target date of 2050.
“In his most recent book The Vanishing Face of Gaia, Lovelock concludes that the damage caused by overpopulation, species decline and carbon emissions is already so great that modern civilisation is finished.” notes James Delingpole at the London Telegraph.
“Before the end of this century, he argues, rising sea levels and overheating will have rendered whole swathes of our planet uninhabitable and such few survivors as there are will have to make do as best they can.” Delingpole adds.
Lovelock, The Royal Society and the OPT may sound like crazy nutcases, but unfortunately for us, they are extremely influential within the environmental movement. They are also far from alone in their thinking.
Mass sterilization, one child policies and a“Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death were all core concepts put forth by John P. Holdren, the man now in control of science policy in the United States, in his co-authored 1977 book, Ecoscience.
Holdren and his colleagues are now at the forefront of efforts to combat “climate change” through similarly insane programs focused around geoengineering the planet. As we reported in April 2009, Holdren advocates “Large-scale geoengineering projects designed to cool the Earth,” such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays,” which many have pointed out is already occurring via the spraying of chemtrails.
Is Holdren another one off mad kook that has somehow wormed his way into a position of great influence? Not according to leading NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen, who fully endorses Holdren’s view that industrial civilization should be destroyed to save the planet.
The same talking points raised by the OPT and James Lovelock have been re-iterated again and again by public policy groups and environmentalists, as well as the most influential scientists in the US government.
While you and I may think the notions of sterilization and depopulation could never be accepted by the public, those very concepts are now being embraced and popularized as the way forward for humanity.
Linking environmental policy to depopulation agendas opens the door to eugenics and it is no surprise that through that door have come pouring hordes of elitist filth just begging to be on the front line of the extermination policy.
While they peddle their insane proposals, backed by rampant fearmongering over climate change on behalf of our governments and the mainstream media, it is we who are charged with saving the planet and our place on it by exposing their nefarious agenda of mass depopulation before it is too late.
Population reduction enthusiast says “a few people with authority” should run the planet
Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Tuesday, March 30th, 2010
A renowned environmentalist, known for his advocacy of population reduction as a means of offsetting climate change, has called for “a more authoritative world” where freedom comes second to tackling what he sees as the devastating effects of global warming.
Futurist James Lovelock, tells the London Guardian that he believes “It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while,” in order to save humanity.
“We need a more authoritative world.” Lovelock states.
“We’ve become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It’s all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can’t do that.” the 90 year old proponent of the Gaia hypothesis adds.
“You’ve got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.”
“But it can’t happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What’s the alternative to democracy? There isn’t one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.” Lovelock concludes.
Which “people with authority” could Lovelock have in mind for this tyrannical takeover in the name of mother Earth? Certainly not the disgraced UN affiliated climate scientists, whose involvement in several recent scandals even Lovelock admits is reprehensible:
“Fudging the data in any way whatsoever is quite literally a sin against the holy ghost of science. I’m not religious, but I put it that way because I feel so strongly. It’s the one thing you do not ever do. You’ve got to have standards.” he states in the interview.
Lovelock also has little faith in renewable energies, carbon trading or cap and tax schemes, which he previously told the New Scientist are “verging on a gigantic scam”:
Carbon trading, with its huge government subsidies, is just what finance and industry wanted. It’s not going to do a damn thing about climate change, but it’ll make a lot of money for a lot of people and postpone the moment of reckoning. I am not against renewable energy, but to spoil all the decent countryside in the UK with wind farms is driving me mad. It’s absolutely unnecessary, and it takes 2500 square kilometres to produce a gigawatt – that’s an awful lot of countryside.
Lovelock repeats this sentiment in his latest interview with the Guardian, noting:
I don’t know enough about carbon trading, but I suspect that it is basically a scam. The whole thing is not very sensible. We have this crazy idea that we are setting an example to the world. What we’re doing is trying to make money out of the world by selling them renewable gadgetry and green ideas. It might be worthy from the national interest, but it is moonshine if you think what the Chinese and Indians are doing [in terms of emissions].
So, perhaps Lovelock would point to his friends at The Optimum Population Trust, a notorious UK-based public policy group that campaigns for a gradual decline in the global human population to what it sees as a “sustainable” level.
Lovelock became a patron of the thinktank in 2009. In a statement released by the trust to mark the appointment, Lovelock called on the environmental movement as a whole to “recognise the truth and speak out” on the link between rising human numbers and global warming.
Lovelock said: “Those who fail to see that population growth and climate change are two sides of the same coin are either ignorant or hiding from the truth. These two huge environmental problems are inseparable and to discuss one while ignoring the other is irrational.”
He added: “How can we possibly decrease carbon emissions and land use while the number of emitters and the space they occupy remorselessly increases? When will the environmentalists who claim to be green recognise the truth and speak out?”
So, essentially Dr Lovelock advocates the destruction of freedom in order that an overriding authoritative global power can oversee the radical stemming of the planet’s human population – nice.
Roger Martin, chair of OPT, said of Lovelock’s appointment: “We desperately need to remember that future population growth is not a ‘fact’ to be passively accepted but something over which we have control, and that limiting it could therefore play a major role in curbing emissions. Tragically, the green movement has chosen to forget this. With the help of eminent individuals such as James Lovelock, we will do our best to remind them.”
The OPT also has as patrons controversial primatologist and environmentalist Jane Goodall, who thinks that caging chimps and other apes is better for them than letting them live free in the wild; Professor Aubrey Manning, president of the UK’s Wildlife Trusts; and Sir Crispin Tickell, the ex-diplomat credited with the “greening” of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.
The OPT also boasts as a patron BBC darling wildlife broadcaster and film-maker Sir David Attenborough, who has called for a one child policy like that of Communist China to be implemented in Britain. The proposal is one of the OPT’s main initiatives.
The think tank is also home to Jonathon Porritt, former chair of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, one of Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, who has stated that Britain’s population must be cut in half from around 60 million to 30 million if it is to build a sustainable society.
We have exhaustively exposed the nonsense behind the idea that the Earth’s current population levels are exceeding sustainable levels and are contributing to devastating climate change, however, Lovelock and his ilk at the OPT remain in positions of influence.
Lovelock is also an ardent advocate of geoengineering the planet in the name of controlling the climate. In 2007 Lovelock proposed laying vast swathes of pipes under the world’s oceans in order to pump water from the bottom of the seas – rich in nutrients, but mostly dead – to the top. The idea being that the action would encourage algae to breed, absorb more carbon and release more dimethyl sulphide into the atmosphere, a chemical known to seed sunlight reflecting clouds.
Effectively, Lovelock wants to try and block out the sun, the source of all life on this planet – nice.
Lovelock is also a member of The Royal Society of Edinburgh, an organization that has thrown its full weight behind the global warming movement, lending its absolute support for legislation aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 80%, a process that will devastate the global economy and living standards.
This organization has been even more vehement than national governments in its advocacy of the man-made cause of global warming, calling for such drastic CO2 cuts to be made in the short term, not even by the usual target date of 2050.
“In his most recent book The Vanishing Face of Gaia, Lovelock concludes that the damage caused by overpopulation, species decline and carbon emissions is already so great that modern civilisation is finished.” notes James Delingpole at the London Telegraph.
“Before the end of this century, he argues, rising sea levels and overheating will have rendered whole swathes of our planet uninhabitable and such few survivors as there are will have to make do as best they can.” Delingpole adds.
Lovelock, The Royal Society and the OPT may sound like crazy nutcases, but unfortunately for us, they are extremely influential within the environmental movement. They are also far from alone in their thinking.
Mass sterilization, one child policies and a“Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death were all core concepts put forth by John P. Holdren, the man now in control of science policy in the United States, in his co-authored 1977 book, Ecoscience.
Holdren and his colleagues are now at the forefront of efforts to combat “climate change” through similarly insane programs focused around geoengineering the planet. As we reported in April 2009, Holdren advocates “Large-scale geoengineering projects designed to cool the Earth,” such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays,” which many have pointed out is already occurring via the spraying of chemtrails.
Is Holdren another one off mad kook that has somehow wormed his way into a position of great influence? Not according to leading NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen, who fully endorses Holdren’s view that industrial civilization should be destroyed to save the planet.
The same talking points raised by the OPT and James Lovelock have been re-iterated again and again by public policy groups and environmentalists, as well as the most influential scientists in the US government.
While you and I may think the notions of sterilization and depopulation could never be accepted by the public, those very concepts are now being embraced and popularized as the way forward for humanity.
Linking environmental policy to depopulation agendas opens the door to eugenics and it is no surprise that through that door have come pouring hordes of elitist filth just begging to be on the front line of the extermination policy.
While they peddle their insane proposals, backed by rampant fearmongering over climate change on behalf of our governments and the mainstream media, it is we who are charged with saving the planet and our place on it by exposing their nefarious agenda of mass depopulation before it is too late.
Federal Textbook Act, Take control of the pricing and availability of the text books
Federal Textbook Act, Take control of the pricing and availability of the text books
Obama To Take Over Control of College Textbooks?
By Warner Todd Huston Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Candace de Russy over at National Review posted an alarming example of Obama power grab. Or perhaps more precisely it’s yet another alarming example of an Obama power grab. This time Obama apparently is setting the table to take control of what is printed in our nation’s college textbooks.
This one slipped past my radar in August of 2009, but apparently Barack Obama signed the Federal Textbook Act (Download .pdf file) that made provisions for the federal government to take control of the pricing and availability of the text books in our institutions of higher learning (at least the ones that take federal funding).
According to the language of the act, it is all about keeping textbooks affordable for students.
Purpose and Intent- The purpose of this section is to ensure that students have access to affordable course materials by decreasing costs to students and enhancing transparency and disclosure with respect to the selection, purchase, sale, and use of course materials. It is the intent of this section to encourage all of the involved parties, including faculty, students, administrators, institutions of higher education, bookstores, distributors, and publishers, to work together to identify ways to decrease the cost of college textbooks and supplemental materials for students while supporting the academic freedom of faculty members to select high quality course materials for students.
Sounds good, right?
Maybe not so much.
National Review quotes George Mason economics professor Donald J. Boudreaux as saying that this act seems to be “a first step toward federal oversight of the contents of college textbooks.” As proof he points specifically to section C, the publisher requirements section.
(C) A description of the substantial content revisions made between the current edition of the college textbook or supplemental material and the previous edition, if any.
Why does Obama’s overlords need to know what revisions have been made to a textbook? This act is supposed to be concerned with pricing and availability, not content… isn’t it?
Of course, we all know that once government gets its tendrils into your business, it takes all power away from you and reassigns it to government. So, once this act is implemented, any federal money involved will give government the opening to begin controlling everything in the process of creating and distributing college textbooks.
As prof Boudreaux points out, if people are upset over the recent newfound control that the conservative-leaning Texas textbook commission had over new textbooks, then how upset might they be if the federal government takes over our college textbooks? There should be no difference at all in the reaction if it was really government control that was being opposed.
Naturally, its always about whose ox is being gored with liberals. Texas textbook control: baaaaad. Obama textbook control: gooooood.
I would also point out one other thing. Many professors in our nation’s colleges and universities have hit the lottery by writing textbooks for their own classes, books that their university will then adopt as the “official” textbook for class work. These professors make a tidy sum of money on these expensive, small print run books that their captive student audience is forced to buy. It would seem to me that this Federal Textbook Act could easily eliminate this lucrative but under-the-radar source of income for professors everywhere. Not that I am against that, but it is something for those lefty profs that so love their Obammessiah to think about.
This bill was originally signed in 2008 by President Bush and was introduced by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin. It took effect this year during Obama’s presidency. But regardless of who signed it — and this shows that Bush was as bad as Obama for his love of big government — it is a bad idea to allow the federal government to get involved in the production of text books.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFP Tools
Share | More
(0) Reader Feedback | Subscribe | Print friendly | Contact Us | Send this page to a friend! |
Warner Todd Huston Bio
Warner Todd Huston Most recent columns
Warner Todd Huston’s thoughtful commentary, sometimes irreverent often historically based, is featured on many websites such as renewamerica.us, townhall.com, opinioneditorials.com, and americandaily.com, among many, many others. He has also written for several history magazines, and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture,” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of Publius’ Forum.
Obama To Take Over Control of College Textbooks?
By Warner Todd Huston Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Candace de Russy over at National Review posted an alarming example of Obama power grab. Or perhaps more precisely it’s yet another alarming example of an Obama power grab. This time Obama apparently is setting the table to take control of what is printed in our nation’s college textbooks.
This one slipped past my radar in August of 2009, but apparently Barack Obama signed the Federal Textbook Act (Download .pdf file) that made provisions for the federal government to take control of the pricing and availability of the text books in our institutions of higher learning (at least the ones that take federal funding).
According to the language of the act, it is all about keeping textbooks affordable for students.
Purpose and Intent- The purpose of this section is to ensure that students have access to affordable course materials by decreasing costs to students and enhancing transparency and disclosure with respect to the selection, purchase, sale, and use of course materials. It is the intent of this section to encourage all of the involved parties, including faculty, students, administrators, institutions of higher education, bookstores, distributors, and publishers, to work together to identify ways to decrease the cost of college textbooks and supplemental materials for students while supporting the academic freedom of faculty members to select high quality course materials for students.
Sounds good, right?
Maybe not so much.
National Review quotes George Mason economics professor Donald J. Boudreaux as saying that this act seems to be “a first step toward federal oversight of the contents of college textbooks.” As proof he points specifically to section C, the publisher requirements section.
(C) A description of the substantial content revisions made between the current edition of the college textbook or supplemental material and the previous edition, if any.
Why does Obama’s overlords need to know what revisions have been made to a textbook? This act is supposed to be concerned with pricing and availability, not content… isn’t it?
Of course, we all know that once government gets its tendrils into your business, it takes all power away from you and reassigns it to government. So, once this act is implemented, any federal money involved will give government the opening to begin controlling everything in the process of creating and distributing college textbooks.
As prof Boudreaux points out, if people are upset over the recent newfound control that the conservative-leaning Texas textbook commission had over new textbooks, then how upset might they be if the federal government takes over our college textbooks? There should be no difference at all in the reaction if it was really government control that was being opposed.
Naturally, its always about whose ox is being gored with liberals. Texas textbook control: baaaaad. Obama textbook control: gooooood.
I would also point out one other thing. Many professors in our nation’s colleges and universities have hit the lottery by writing textbooks for their own classes, books that their university will then adopt as the “official” textbook for class work. These professors make a tidy sum of money on these expensive, small print run books that their captive student audience is forced to buy. It would seem to me that this Federal Textbook Act could easily eliminate this lucrative but under-the-radar source of income for professors everywhere. Not that I am against that, but it is something for those lefty profs that so love their Obammessiah to think about.
This bill was originally signed in 2008 by President Bush and was introduced by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin. It took effect this year during Obama’s presidency. But regardless of who signed it — and this shows that Bush was as bad as Obama for his love of big government — it is a bad idea to allow the federal government to get involved in the production of text books.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CFP Tools
Share | More
(0) Reader Feedback | Subscribe | Print friendly | Contact Us | Send this page to a friend! |
Warner Todd Huston Bio
Warner Todd Huston Most recent columns
Warner Todd Huston’s thoughtful commentary, sometimes irreverent often historically based, is featured on many websites such as renewamerica.us, townhall.com, opinioneditorials.com, and americandaily.com, among many, many others. He has also written for several history magazines, and appears in the new book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture,” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of Publius’ Forum.
Once a socialist/communist dictator gets into power, like terminal cancer he and his administration smother and take control of every aspect of the economy, educational system, health care system and military
Obamacare is just the beginning of a total take over of America
By Dr. Laurie Roth Tuesday, March 30, 2010
America must not and will not become like the seduced German people in 1933. We will not stand by and watch Obama turn our country into Frankenstein’s laboratory, shredding our constitution, bill of rights and freedom as Hitler did with his country.
Tyrants and Dictators are predictably similar in how they take over. They ride in as the savior of change and hope. They offer health care, jobs for all, a refreshed national identity and protection from danger and harm….that is danger and harm they usually create to blame on enemies…..you know those groups who didn’t vote for them. The rope circles around the seduced neck of the people only after the dictator bribes his way in or gets voted in.
One thing is for sure looking at recent history. Once a socialist/communist dictator gets into power, like terminal cancer, he and his administration smother and take control of every aspect of the economy, educational system, health care system and military. They shred and control media, entertainment and religion.
In 1919, Lenin wrote after his takeover of Russia that the way to control a country is to first take over the industry, the land, and the banks. Lenin tricked and inspired millions and so did Hitler. These dictators didn’t come in appearing like monsters. They were the messiahs of change and hope. Their exhaustive plans involved developing a huge and seduced ‘fan’ base at first while aggressively and quickly finding and destroying anyone against them.
Kitty Werthmann was living in Austria when Hitler took over Germany next door. She recalls how deeply depressed Austria was in 1938. Nearly one-third of their workforce was unemployed. They had 25% inflation and 25% interest rates on bank loans.
People were begging for food and bankruptcies were happening daily. Austria was in a mess, so they were thrilled when Hitler promised big things and was elected into power. There was no talk of persecuting or attacking the Jews. The Austrians were promised jobs, healthcare, protection and recovery.
Kitty said that after the election was over there was instantly law and order. German officials were appointed everywhere and there was dancing in the streets. Though Austria was largely a Catholic country, suddenly in schools everywhere, all Catholic symbols and crosses were taken down and pictures of Hitler were put up everywhere.
Hitler targeted and controlled education and stopped religious instruction for kids in schools. The new church for the children of Austria and Germany was still every Sunday, but it now was forced attendance at the National Youth Day. The first two hours was political indoctrination every Sunday, then the rest of the day they played all kinds of sports. Naturally, the equipment was free. Children went home thrilled each Sunday and were getting brainwashed. Parents had no choice but to send their children each Sunday or else be fined or taken to jail.
Hitler immediately introduced socialist health care. People were going to the hospital for everything now, lines were huge and doctors were paid a salary by the Government. The Austrians soon paid 80% of their income in taxes. Government gave loans for the newly married, and took care of everything from day care needs to paying all College tuition.
As the noose tightened around education, religion, healthcare and enforcement, the ‘mercy killings’ started in. Kitty, then a student teacher in a small village in the Alps, described 15 mentally retarded adults who were known in the community and did good manual work. One day they were rounded up and taken to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade and various skills. Their families where forced to sign papers saying that they wouldn’t visit them for 6 months. They were told that any visits could cause homesickness and disrupt the program.
The letters started arriving back to the parents after several months saying these people had died natural deaths. Of course, they all knew 15 completely healthy adults could not, six months later, have all died natural deaths. They knew they were killed. Euthanasia started to become more common as Hitler’s real world view of perfection started to come out.
Hitler’s final control step of the Germans and Austrians was Gun laws and control. He started with gun registration. Once that was done, he said that guns were causing too much crime and that it was best for all to turn in their guns. They knew that authorities already knew who owned what so they complied.
When you look at Hitler, Saul Alinsky, Stalin, Lenin, Chavez, Castro and others, you see huge similarities with the strategy and world view of Obama. It is the same, promise of health care, jobs and opportunities. There is always a contrived crises or two the big Government has to magically solve, while blaming the enemies they want to create.
Obama is on the same control and dictatorship path as Hitler. First we saw the massive seduction over 15 months; now the controls and intimidation grow with his administration.
This Health care bill might as well have been Hitler’s Enabling Act of March 23rd, 1933. It also shreds our constitution and forces socialized health care on the people, rationing care for the unwanted and expensive seniors as they age, and forcing us all to pay for the Government slaughter of babies; abortion. This bill, run by the IRS, might as well be the Nazi party, as it encourages euthanasia, abortion and rationed care as Hitler did early on in Austria and Germany.
Rep. Burgess stated the obvious about this nightmare bill when asked about the use of the ‘Commerce clause’ excusing forced mandates by the Government. In a CNSNews.com interview Rep. Burgess, a doctor, stated, “No, I personally do not, and I think that is exactly right. Never before in the history of this country have we had the ability to coerce American citizens to purchase something and then invoke the Commerce clause after we coerce that purchase.” He went on…..”It just flies in the face of what a free society should be, so I’m perfectly comfortable with the attorneys general bringing suit against this bill,”
Yes, law suits are flying by Attorney Generals and other groups. We must stand no matter how awkward, inconvenient or expensive it is. Our freedom and country is at stake.
Obama isn’t stopping with forced Health care and the controls attached to that. He is going to manipulate votes by pushing amnesty for illegal aliens; controlling American businesses through cap and trade, then he will find a manipulative, back door way to come for our guns….most likely with a UN Treaty he is already working toward.
Obama continues to mock anyone who disagrees with him, and is now, according to the Wall Street Journal, stepping up Confrontation . Obama must be voted out. I don’t see any tin helmet on my head, and yes…..Obama comes from the same essence and evil as Hitler.
Obamacare is just the beginning of a total take over of America
By Dr. Laurie Roth Tuesday, March 30, 2010
America must not and will not become like the seduced German people in 1933. We will not stand by and watch Obama turn our country into Frankenstein’s laboratory, shredding our constitution, bill of rights and freedom as Hitler did with his country.
Tyrants and Dictators are predictably similar in how they take over. They ride in as the savior of change and hope. They offer health care, jobs for all, a refreshed national identity and protection from danger and harm….that is danger and harm they usually create to blame on enemies…..you know those groups who didn’t vote for them. The rope circles around the seduced neck of the people only after the dictator bribes his way in or gets voted in.
One thing is for sure looking at recent history. Once a socialist/communist dictator gets into power, like terminal cancer, he and his administration smother and take control of every aspect of the economy, educational system, health care system and military. They shred and control media, entertainment and religion.
In 1919, Lenin wrote after his takeover of Russia that the way to control a country is to first take over the industry, the land, and the banks. Lenin tricked and inspired millions and so did Hitler. These dictators didn’t come in appearing like monsters. They were the messiahs of change and hope. Their exhaustive plans involved developing a huge and seduced ‘fan’ base at first while aggressively and quickly finding and destroying anyone against them.
Kitty Werthmann was living in Austria when Hitler took over Germany next door. She recalls how deeply depressed Austria was in 1938. Nearly one-third of their workforce was unemployed. They had 25% inflation and 25% interest rates on bank loans.
People were begging for food and bankruptcies were happening daily. Austria was in a mess, so they were thrilled when Hitler promised big things and was elected into power. There was no talk of persecuting or attacking the Jews. The Austrians were promised jobs, healthcare, protection and recovery.
Kitty said that after the election was over there was instantly law and order. German officials were appointed everywhere and there was dancing in the streets. Though Austria was largely a Catholic country, suddenly in schools everywhere, all Catholic symbols and crosses were taken down and pictures of Hitler were put up everywhere.
Hitler targeted and controlled education and stopped religious instruction for kids in schools. The new church for the children of Austria and Germany was still every Sunday, but it now was forced attendance at the National Youth Day. The first two hours was political indoctrination every Sunday, then the rest of the day they played all kinds of sports. Naturally, the equipment was free. Children went home thrilled each Sunday and were getting brainwashed. Parents had no choice but to send their children each Sunday or else be fined or taken to jail.
Hitler immediately introduced socialist health care. People were going to the hospital for everything now, lines were huge and doctors were paid a salary by the Government. The Austrians soon paid 80% of their income in taxes. Government gave loans for the newly married, and took care of everything from day care needs to paying all College tuition.
As the noose tightened around education, religion, healthcare and enforcement, the ‘mercy killings’ started in. Kitty, then a student teacher in a small village in the Alps, described 15 mentally retarded adults who were known in the community and did good manual work. One day they were rounded up and taken to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade and various skills. Their families where forced to sign papers saying that they wouldn’t visit them for 6 months. They were told that any visits could cause homesickness and disrupt the program.
The letters started arriving back to the parents after several months saying these people had died natural deaths. Of course, they all knew 15 completely healthy adults could not, six months later, have all died natural deaths. They knew they were killed. Euthanasia started to become more common as Hitler’s real world view of perfection started to come out.
Hitler’s final control step of the Germans and Austrians was Gun laws and control. He started with gun registration. Once that was done, he said that guns were causing too much crime and that it was best for all to turn in their guns. They knew that authorities already knew who owned what so they complied.
When you look at Hitler, Saul Alinsky, Stalin, Lenin, Chavez, Castro and others, you see huge similarities with the strategy and world view of Obama. It is the same, promise of health care, jobs and opportunities. There is always a contrived crises or two the big Government has to magically solve, while blaming the enemies they want to create.
Obama is on the same control and dictatorship path as Hitler. First we saw the massive seduction over 15 months; now the controls and intimidation grow with his administration.
This Health care bill might as well have been Hitler’s Enabling Act of March 23rd, 1933. It also shreds our constitution and forces socialized health care on the people, rationing care for the unwanted and expensive seniors as they age, and forcing us all to pay for the Government slaughter of babies; abortion. This bill, run by the IRS, might as well be the Nazi party, as it encourages euthanasia, abortion and rationed care as Hitler did early on in Austria and Germany.
Rep. Burgess stated the obvious about this nightmare bill when asked about the use of the ‘Commerce clause’ excusing forced mandates by the Government. In a CNSNews.com interview Rep. Burgess, a doctor, stated, “No, I personally do not, and I think that is exactly right. Never before in the history of this country have we had the ability to coerce American citizens to purchase something and then invoke the Commerce clause after we coerce that purchase.” He went on…..”It just flies in the face of what a free society should be, so I’m perfectly comfortable with the attorneys general bringing suit against this bill,”
Yes, law suits are flying by Attorney Generals and other groups. We must stand no matter how awkward, inconvenient or expensive it is. Our freedom and country is at stake.
Obama isn’t stopping with forced Health care and the controls attached to that. He is going to manipulate votes by pushing amnesty for illegal aliens; controlling American businesses through cap and trade, then he will find a manipulative, back door way to come for our guns….most likely with a UN Treaty he is already working toward.
Obama continues to mock anyone who disagrees with him, and is now, according to the Wall Street Journal, stepping up Confrontation . Obama must be voted out. I don’t see any tin helmet on my head, and yes…..Obama comes from the same essence and evil as Hitler.
What Doctors Don't Tell You
Home Blogs Forums
Lynne McTaggart - What Doctors Don't Tell You
Monkeying with the truth
The US and UK governments and the press are exulting in the recent highly public hanging of Dr Andrew Wakefield, found guilty of misconduct by the British General Medical Council (GMC). Wakefield, you may recall, is the British gastroenterologist who first raised the alarm bells over the measles–mumps–rubella vaccine (MMR).
In the minds of many medicos and in the press, the MMR vaccine now stands fully vindicated. The scientist who claimed that the MMR vaccine causes autism has been discredited. Order has been restored.
In our Special Report this month, publisher Bryan Hubbard set out both to investigate the Wakefield decision and to uncover any evidence purporting to demonstrate the safety of the vaccine.
Wakefield never maintained that the MMR vaccine caused autism. All he did was raise a cautious alarm after finding that a number of children with autism were presenting with the same gut problems that seemed to have developed right after their MMR jabs.
Now, he and his colleagues in America have carried out a subsequent study on monkeys, which demonstrated that the hepatitis B vaccine can cause neurological damage and progressively severe chronic inflammation in gastrointestinal tissue—exactly what he originally discovered with the MMR vaccine and autistic children.
Despite being exhaustively peer-reviewed and accepted for publication, Wakefield’s monkey study was subsequently pulled as ‘not suitable’ for publication after the GMC delivered its verdict. The pulling of the study ultimately became the centrepiece of our story. The more that Bryan dug into this issue, the more layers of deceit he uncovered in the form of censorship, data-massaging and burying of damning data.
He found dirty tricks at the heart of medicine that would have made Richard Nixon’s Watergate henchmen proud. He found journalism bought and paid for by drug companies.
But what has been most shocking to us as journalists is the misinformation spread about by our own colleagues in the press. Virtually no major newspaper, or TV or radio station (save the Huffington Post) has bothered to look beyond the official releases of the GMC or government agencies to learn the truth about MMR. Some journalists have even allowed themselves to get in bed with drug companies.
The safety of the vaccine is now beside the point. Wakefield’s error was to challenge medicine’s most sacred cow: vaccination is now in a sense a standard-bearer for a certain mindset. It represents the triumph of Science over the randomness of Nature. Most doctors look to vaccination as proof that medicine has conquered infectious disease.
Researchers, scientific publications, doctors, drug companies and even journalists are willing to do almost anything to maintain that assumption of a priori benefit. Vaccination is now performed for its own sake—whether or not it is necessary, beneficial or even safe. To attack anything about any jab has come to be viewed as treason.
What needs to be put on display is not an honest scientist like Wakefield, but the level of deceit that is now routine—among scientists, researchers and reporters—all in the name of the public ‘interest’.
Lynne McTaggart - What Doctors Don't Tell You
Monkeying with the truth
The US and UK governments and the press are exulting in the recent highly public hanging of Dr Andrew Wakefield, found guilty of misconduct by the British General Medical Council (GMC). Wakefield, you may recall, is the British gastroenterologist who first raised the alarm bells over the measles–mumps–rubella vaccine (MMR).
In the minds of many medicos and in the press, the MMR vaccine now stands fully vindicated. The scientist who claimed that the MMR vaccine causes autism has been discredited. Order has been restored.
In our Special Report this month, publisher Bryan Hubbard set out both to investigate the Wakefield decision and to uncover any evidence purporting to demonstrate the safety of the vaccine.
Wakefield never maintained that the MMR vaccine caused autism. All he did was raise a cautious alarm after finding that a number of children with autism were presenting with the same gut problems that seemed to have developed right after their MMR jabs.
Now, he and his colleagues in America have carried out a subsequent study on monkeys, which demonstrated that the hepatitis B vaccine can cause neurological damage and progressively severe chronic inflammation in gastrointestinal tissue—exactly what he originally discovered with the MMR vaccine and autistic children.
Despite being exhaustively peer-reviewed and accepted for publication, Wakefield’s monkey study was subsequently pulled as ‘not suitable’ for publication after the GMC delivered its verdict. The pulling of the study ultimately became the centrepiece of our story. The more that Bryan dug into this issue, the more layers of deceit he uncovered in the form of censorship, data-massaging and burying of damning data.
He found dirty tricks at the heart of medicine that would have made Richard Nixon’s Watergate henchmen proud. He found journalism bought and paid for by drug companies.
But what has been most shocking to us as journalists is the misinformation spread about by our own colleagues in the press. Virtually no major newspaper, or TV or radio station (save the Huffington Post) has bothered to look beyond the official releases of the GMC or government agencies to learn the truth about MMR. Some journalists have even allowed themselves to get in bed with drug companies.
The safety of the vaccine is now beside the point. Wakefield’s error was to challenge medicine’s most sacred cow: vaccination is now in a sense a standard-bearer for a certain mindset. It represents the triumph of Science over the randomness of Nature. Most doctors look to vaccination as proof that medicine has conquered infectious disease.
Researchers, scientific publications, doctors, drug companies and even journalists are willing to do almost anything to maintain that assumption of a priori benefit. Vaccination is now performed for its own sake—whether or not it is necessary, beneficial or even safe. To attack anything about any jab has come to be viewed as treason.
What needs to be put on display is not an honest scientist like Wakefield, but the level of deceit that is now routine—among scientists, researchers and reporters—all in the name of the public ‘interest’.
Pet Vaccinations
How to Be a Smart Vaccine Consumer
1.Discuss what kinds of vaccines your pet needs, and how often, with your veterinarian. I strongly encourage you to seek out a holistic vet to care for your pet, and especially when it comes to vaccinations.
If you can’t locate a holistic vet in your area, make sure not to take your pet to any veterinary practice that promotes annual or more frequent re-vaccinations, or sells “puppy packages,” where you get all the vaccines for a “bargain price.” And don’t use any boarding facility, groomer, training facility or other animal service that requires you to vaccinate your pet more than necessary.
Ideally, well educated people in the pet community accept titers -- seek out and support these businesses.
2.Make sure each vaccine your dog or cat receives meets the following criteria:
◦It is for a serious disease (this eliminates many on the list immediately)
◦Your pet has the opportunity to be exposed to the disease (indoor cats have little to no exposure)
◦The vaccine is considered both effective and safe
◦If you do vaccinate your pet, ask your holistic vet to provide a homeopathic vaccine detox called Thuja (for all vaccines except Rabies)
3.Do not vaccinate your dog or cat if it has had a serious life-threatening vaccine reaction.
4.Rabies vaccines are required by law. There are two varieties of the same vaccine – the 1-year type and the 3-year type. Ask for the 3-year vaccine, and ask your holistic vet about the homeopathic rabies vaccine detoxifier called Lyssin. There is also an immunologically less reactive vaccine called Purevax, but it’s only labeled for 1-year duration. If you are working with a holistic vet, ask to have the rabies vaccine given after 4 months of age, preferably closer to 6 months, to reduce possible reactions.
5.Insist on a Vaccine Titer Test. This test will help you and the doctor determine whether your pet has adequate immunological protection from previous vaccinations. Antibody levels can be measured from a blood draw. The type of titer that best assesses immune system response to vaccines is called the indirect immunofluorescent antibody (IFA) test.
Many veterinary state teaching hospitals will offer this test, as do private veterinary labs such as Antech or Idexx. Remember, you can’t add immunity to an already immune pet, so don’t keep vaccinating!
6.Discuss with your vet the risks vs. benefits of the vaccines you’re considering, as well as the likelihood your pet will be exposed to each disease.
7.If your cat lives indoors and never goes outside to risk exposure to infectious diseases, she does not need to be vaccinated annually. It is my belief that over-vaccination is one of the primary reasons the general health of housecats is deteriorating.
What About Puppy and Kitten Shots – Are They Really Safe?
Companion animals are not born with lifelong protective immunity, it must be established. And unlike many of the human infectious diseases that have been eradicated from this country, there are still lots of outbreaks of parvo and distemper across the country every year.
As Dr. Ron Schultz (head of the Immunology Department of the University of Wisconsin Veterinary School) says (and I paraphrase), ideally “more immunized dogs would have less vaccines and less immunized dogs would have more vaccines.”
In essence, vets still see lots of young pets die from preventable infectious diseases. The reason these diseases have not been eradicated is there is a pool of unvaccinated domesticated pets that are harboring these diseases.
Dr. Schultz argues that if these animals had been protected against disease, less disease would be transmitted. Likewise, if we would stop unnecessarily vaccinating already-protected pets, less degenerative disease would occur, and he’s right.
At my clinic, Natural Pet Animal Hospital, we tailor make all vaccine protocols to minimize risk and maximize protection, taking into account the breed, background (was the pup orphaned, etc.), nutritional status and overall vitality.
Most of the time, with healthy animals, we follow Dr. Schultz’s protocol of providing a single parvo and distemper vaccine at or before 12 weeks of age, and a set after 14 weeks of age. We titer pets 2 weeks after the last vaccine and if they have been successfully immunized, they are protected for life.
Nice, huh?
Should the titer tests indicate vaccine levels are low, we recommend a booster for only the specific virus or viruses that titered low. Hence the importance of working with a holistic vet that carries single vaccines.
We do not use or recommend combination vaccines (six to eight viruses in one shot), which is the traditional yearly booster. We also offer the option to boost a pet’s immunity naturally with homeopathic nosodes rather than traditional vaccination. Nosodes cannot be guaranteed to be effective and will not result in a measurable titer.
Reference:
Vaccinations in Veterinary Medicine: Dogs and Cats
1.Discuss what kinds of vaccines your pet needs, and how often, with your veterinarian. I strongly encourage you to seek out a holistic vet to care for your pet, and especially when it comes to vaccinations.
If you can’t locate a holistic vet in your area, make sure not to take your pet to any veterinary practice that promotes annual or more frequent re-vaccinations, or sells “puppy packages,” where you get all the vaccines for a “bargain price.” And don’t use any boarding facility, groomer, training facility or other animal service that requires you to vaccinate your pet more than necessary.
Ideally, well educated people in the pet community accept titers -- seek out and support these businesses.
2.Make sure each vaccine your dog or cat receives meets the following criteria:
◦It is for a serious disease (this eliminates many on the list immediately)
◦Your pet has the opportunity to be exposed to the disease (indoor cats have little to no exposure)
◦The vaccine is considered both effective and safe
◦If you do vaccinate your pet, ask your holistic vet to provide a homeopathic vaccine detox called Thuja (for all vaccines except Rabies)
3.Do not vaccinate your dog or cat if it has had a serious life-threatening vaccine reaction.
4.Rabies vaccines are required by law. There are two varieties of the same vaccine – the 1-year type and the 3-year type. Ask for the 3-year vaccine, and ask your holistic vet about the homeopathic rabies vaccine detoxifier called Lyssin. There is also an immunologically less reactive vaccine called Purevax, but it’s only labeled for 1-year duration. If you are working with a holistic vet, ask to have the rabies vaccine given after 4 months of age, preferably closer to 6 months, to reduce possible reactions.
5.Insist on a Vaccine Titer Test. This test will help you and the doctor determine whether your pet has adequate immunological protection from previous vaccinations. Antibody levels can be measured from a blood draw. The type of titer that best assesses immune system response to vaccines is called the indirect immunofluorescent antibody (IFA) test.
Many veterinary state teaching hospitals will offer this test, as do private veterinary labs such as Antech or Idexx. Remember, you can’t add immunity to an already immune pet, so don’t keep vaccinating!
6.Discuss with your vet the risks vs. benefits of the vaccines you’re considering, as well as the likelihood your pet will be exposed to each disease.
7.If your cat lives indoors and never goes outside to risk exposure to infectious diseases, she does not need to be vaccinated annually. It is my belief that over-vaccination is one of the primary reasons the general health of housecats is deteriorating.
What About Puppy and Kitten Shots – Are They Really Safe?
Companion animals are not born with lifelong protective immunity, it must be established. And unlike many of the human infectious diseases that have been eradicated from this country, there are still lots of outbreaks of parvo and distemper across the country every year.
As Dr. Ron Schultz (head of the Immunology Department of the University of Wisconsin Veterinary School) says (and I paraphrase), ideally “more immunized dogs would have less vaccines and less immunized dogs would have more vaccines.”
In essence, vets still see lots of young pets die from preventable infectious diseases. The reason these diseases have not been eradicated is there is a pool of unvaccinated domesticated pets that are harboring these diseases.
Dr. Schultz argues that if these animals had been protected against disease, less disease would be transmitted. Likewise, if we would stop unnecessarily vaccinating already-protected pets, less degenerative disease would occur, and he’s right.
At my clinic, Natural Pet Animal Hospital, we tailor make all vaccine protocols to minimize risk and maximize protection, taking into account the breed, background (was the pup orphaned, etc.), nutritional status and overall vitality.
Most of the time, with healthy animals, we follow Dr. Schultz’s protocol of providing a single parvo and distemper vaccine at or before 12 weeks of age, and a set after 14 weeks of age. We titer pets 2 weeks after the last vaccine and if they have been successfully immunized, they are protected for life.
Nice, huh?
Should the titer tests indicate vaccine levels are low, we recommend a booster for only the specific virus or viruses that titered low. Hence the importance of working with a holistic vet that carries single vaccines.
We do not use or recommend combination vaccines (six to eight viruses in one shot), which is the traditional yearly booster. We also offer the option to boost a pet’s immunity naturally with homeopathic nosodes rather than traditional vaccination. Nosodes cannot be guaranteed to be effective and will not result in a measurable titer.
Reference:
Vaccinations in Veterinary Medicine: Dogs and Cats
NEW EPA Alerts Pet Owners to Dangers of Flea/Tick Products
NEW! EPA Alerts Pet Owners to Dangers of Flea/Tick Products
Email this article to a friend Bookmark & Share Previous Post Next Post
Please or to continue.
Save Options Private Favorites (This will appear on your saved articles for later viewing)
Shared Favorites (This will appear on your profile as one of your favorites)
Invite Your Friends Invite Your Friends Email this article to a friend
In mid-March the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) held a free, public webinar titled “Evaluation of Pet Spot-on Flea and Tick Products and Next Steps.”
The purpose of the webinar was to discuss findings from a five-year study of flea and tick products. The increased scrutiny was prompted by rising rates of adverse effects from these products.
"(Current) label warnings simply are not working,” according to Steve Owens, assistant administrator of EPA's Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.
To combat it, the EPA is calling for new labeling requirements including warnings, a listing of possible symptoms, better labeling instructions, dosage guidelines for consumers and even possible restrictions of certain ingredients. No products are being banned, but Owens says EPA isn't ruling out such drastic measures in the future.
Sources:
dvm360, March 16, 2010
dvm360, March 17, 2010
Dr. Becker's Comments:
In April of last year, the EPA issued an advisory about “spot-on” chemical products. These are products applied to the neck or back of dogs and cats as a flea and tick preventive.
The advisory was issued due to a significant increase in reported adverse reactions -- everything from mild skin irritation to seizures and death. In 2008, over 44,000 reactions presumed to be tied to spot-on products were reported by pet owners, veterinarians and other animal caretakers.
If you’re wondering why the EPA is involved in regulation of a pet medication, it’s because these particular products are considered pesticides, and pesticides fall under the EPA’s jurisdiction.
At the time the advisory was issued, manufacturers of spot-on flea and tick products predictably pointed out that no cause-and-effect relationship between the products and reported adverse reactions had been confirmed.
Common sense and the first-hand experience of people who have used the products, however, points to the extremely high likelihood that 44,000 reports in a single year do indeed link application of the products with adverse reactions.
And in fact, the 44,000 reported incidents in 2008 is a significant jump from 28,000 the prior year, and includes 600 deaths.
In my opinion, the risks of these products are simply too great to warrant their routine (monthly) use. I encourage my dog and cat owner clients to avoid these pesticides in favor of safer alternatives.
I’ll discuss my recommendations for harmless, natural flea and tick control a little later in this article.
What the EPA Found
1.Most adverse reactions were seen in dogs weighing between 10 and 20 pounds.
2.Reactions in mixed breed dogs were most commonly reported, however, the Chihuahua, Shih Tzu, Miniature Poodle, Pomeranian, Dachshund, Maltese, Yorkshire Terrier and Bichon Frise seem particularly at risk.
3.Products containing cyphenothrin and permethrin were especially problematic for small breed dogs.
4.Most incidents occurred in dogs under three years old, likely at their first exposure to a spot-on product.
5.Adverse reactions for both dogs and cats were primarily skin, GI tract and nervous system related. Skin reactions included redness, itching, hair loss, sores and ulcers.
6.Gastrointestinal symptoms included vomiting, diarrhea and salivation.
7.Reported nervous system symptoms included lethargy, nervousness, ataxia (movement problems), tremors and seizure.
8.A number of adverse reactions in cats were the result of the cat either being treated with a product intended for dogs, or through exposure to a treated dog. Cats treated with products intended for dogs had an especially rate of serious reactions and fatalities.
9.Inert ingredients in spot-on products were generally assumed to contribute to toxicity.
10.Dosage ranges were considered to be too wide in some cases.
11.Product labeling was identified as needing a revamp in many cases.
12.The EPA’s Companion Animal Studies guidelines are insufficient to predict the toxicity of spot-on products.
The full EPA report can be found here, and includes a list of the specific products reviewed and the adverse reactions reported for each. For more information, you can also review the EPA Analysis and Mitigation Plan.
My Recommendations for Safe, Natural Flea and Tick Control
In addition to the risks associated with spot-on treatments, there is simply no chemical based pest control pill, dip, solution, shampoo, or collar that is without the potential for side effects.
Just because a compound is applied to or worn on your pet’s fur doesn’t mean it’s safe. Remember: what goes on your pet goes in your pet, by absorption through the skin or ingestion during grooming.
Fleas, ticks, mosquitoes and other parasites feed first on unhealthy animals. So the goal of preventive pest control is to bring your dog or cat to optimal health, which will make him naturally more resilient and less attractive to parasites.
Toward that end, I encourage you to work with your holistic vet -- visit the American Holistic Veterinary Medicine Association to find one who should also be able to provide a number of natural products for pest control.
Here are just a few suggestions:
•Essential oil sprays containing lavender, peppermint, geranium, lemongrass or citronella can be very effective as parasite deterrents. You need to purchase a pre-blended product or work with an animal aromatherapist to make sure you’re using safe oils at the correct concentration as dog and cat doses are different
•Cedar oil is a long-recognized flea eradicator, and products exist that are specially formulated for cats and dogs.
•Natural, food-grade diatomaceous earth helps to remove fleas and ticks from your pet’s body.
•Fresh garlic can be given to dogs and cats to prevent internal as well as external parasites. Work with your vet to determine a safe amount for your pet’s body weight.
If You Must Use a Chemical Pest Preventive, Here Are Some Tips for Reducing the Risk to Your Pet
1.Be very careful to follow dosing directions on the label, and if your pet is at the low end of a dosage range, step down to the next lowest dosage. Be extremely cautious with small dogs, especially if you own one of the breeds reported to be at high risk for adverse reactions. And do not under any circumstances apply dog product to your cat.
2.Don’t depend exclusively on chemical treatments. Rotate natural preventives with chemical ones. An every other month rotation works well for many pet owners. In many parts of the country owners find they can successfully control ticks with 2 doses a year: one in the spring and one in the late summer.
3.Monitor your pet for adverse reactions after you apply a chemical product – especially when using one for the first time. Keep an eye out for symptoms like those described in numbers 5, 6 and 7 above under “What the EPA Found.”
4.Since your pet’s liver will be tasked with processing the chemicals that make it into the bloodstream, it can be very beneficial to give your dog or cat a supplement to help detoxify her liver. I recommend milk thistle, which is a detox agent and also helps to actually regenerate liver cells.
You can get milk thistle through your holistic vet, who should also guide you on how much to give your pet depending on her age, weight and the medications she’s taking. I recommend one dose daily for seven days following any flea, tick or heartworm application.
5.Another product I recommend is chlorella, a super green food that is a very powerful detox agent. Your holistic vet should also advise you about how much chlorella to give your pet.
Remember -- keeping your pet’s immune system healthy and strong is the best way to help him fight off parasites as well as disease. A high quality, species appropriate diet is the foundation upon which your pet’s good health and long life must be built.
Related Links:
These Meds Might Be 'Safe' for You... But They Can KILL Your Pet
What to Do When Your Pet has Allergies...
How Often Should You Bathe Your Pet?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
