LCBO Raises Prices for 'Social Responsibility'?

Every once in a while, the Liquor Control Board of Ontario raises prices for 'social responsibility'. They have claimed that raising prices of alcohol will prevent people from consuming too much. Here is a statement from their website (http://www.lcbo.com/socialresponsibility/ourcommitment.shtml):

 "...we carry low-alcohol products and set minimum prices, since research shows that price affects consumption levels."

Cans of beer were raised by 5-10 cents and bottles of wine by 15 cents. In Ontario, $2.00 cans of 500ml imported beer have been available for years, and still are (as of June 2013).

So, here are some questions I have:

1) Why are they having sales and lowering the prices of certain brands? Doesn't this go directly against the concept of 'social responsibility'?

2) Why did they allow people to hoard alcohol when word of a possible labour strike was announced before a holiday weekend? Isn't allowing 'hoarding' irresponsible?

3) Is 'social responsibility' a more easily digestible term than 'maximizing profit'? Hmmmm.

4) Will a 5 cent raise in price per can of beer or 15 cent raise in price for a bottle of wine prevent a person from buying their regular amount of alcohol? I think not.

Be careful of what they tell you.

Seattle Man Cured of HIV?

As I watched FOX News today, then subsequently read The Seattle Times article about a man 'cured of HIV', I began to dig further.

Here is the opening of the online article for The Seattle Times story:

"Early reports identified him only as “the Berlin patient.” But Timothy Ray Brown, the first person cured of HIV, was born and raised in Seattle."

Back in March, 2013, a baby was supposedly cured of HIV. A baby is a person, so Timothy Ray Brown could not be the 'first person' cured of HIV.

As The Seattle Times states: "Other scientists think early, aggressive treatment of HIV might be able to eliminate the virus. That’s what happened with a baby in Mississippi who was born infected. Doctors immediately administered high doses of drugs. More than two years later, the child seems to be HIV-free."

(sources listed in previous blog: http://theverbalproletariat.blogspot.ca/2013/03/mississippi-baby-cured-of-hiv.html)

Not only was Mr. Brown 'not the first person cured of HIV', but the question remains - did he even have HIV? As The Seattle Times also states:

"Brown spent most of 2008 in the hospital. But every time Hütter tested him for HIV, the tests came up blank. Today, Brown no longer takes drugs for HIV, and no tests have detected virus anywhere in his body."

First of all, no HIV test can detect the HIV virus in the blood (see below), and anybody who can read and interpret English will understand the package inserts that come with standard HIV tests; for example:

"A Reactive result by Uni-GoldTM Recombigen® HIV suggests the presence of anti-HIV-1 antibodies in the specimen. Uni-GoldTM Recombigen® HIV is intended as an aid in the diagnosis of infection with HIV-1. AIDS and AIDS-related conditions are clinical symptoms and their diagnosis can only be established clinically."

"EIA testing alone cannot be used to diagnose AIDS, even if the recommended investigation of reactive specimens suggests a high probability that the antibody to HIV-1 is present. [...] At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence and absence of HIV-1 antibody in human blood." 

"Do not use this kit as the sole basis of diagnosing HIV-1 infection" (HIV-1 Western Blot Kit, Epitope, Inc., Organon Teknika Corporation PN201-3039 Revision #8)

So, unless there is a new test that can actually 'detect a virus', I rest my case; be very careful of what you are lead to believe! There is a lot more to any news story than a headline.

You may also want to read about AZT and Leukemia.

HPV Vaccine for Boys and Girls? Hmmmmmm....

The news keeps reporting on the HPV vaccine debate, with some channels actually showing opinions from both sides of the debate. The question is, should boys be given the vaccine to prevent certain cancers as well as girls?

It is known that certain individuals have adverse reactions, and that, as stated by the reporter, "of the 35 million doses distributed in the US, some 18, 727 adverse events were reported and only 8% of those were considered serious." Darren Brown, MD, IU Professor of Medicine and vaccine developer who helped create the HPV vaccine, added: "None of which the CDC investigators have felt have been attributable to the vaccine (sic)." (source: 24 Hour News 8 wishtv.com via Mercola.com).

It is interesting that the affected group of girls in the news report all spoke freely to the reporter, but when the reporter wanted their doctor's point of view, she stated: "...not one would talk to me."

Forget the news! In this case, it opens up questions from the public, but having a vaccine-developer MD and Professor of Medicine say what he said, we are left with more questions that answers! 

Does the vaccine have a risk of cancer? Read below.
Does the vaccine work in everybody? Read below.
Does the 'prevalence of HPV infection' affect a blood test for it? Read below.
Does this vaccine protect against all types of HPV? Read below.
Can this vaccine kill you? Read below.

Why not go straight to the sources? Firstly, the blood test for HPV, according to the package insert:

"C. Prevalence of HPV infection in a population may affect performance. Positive predictive values decrease when testing populations with low prevalence or individuals with no risk of infection 


Note: Results of this test should only be interpreted in conjunction with information available from clinical evaluation of the patient and patient history."
http://www.gen-probe.com/pdfs/pi/502170-EN-RevA.pdf

Now, let's look at the package insert for the HPV vaccine itself:


"GARDASIL has not been demonstrated to protect against 
diseases due to HPV types not contained in the vaccine. (1.3) 
(14.4) (14.5) 


Not all vulvar, vaginal, and anal cancers are caused by HPV, and 
GARDASIL protects only against those vulvar, vaginal, and anal
cancers caused by HPV 16 and 18. (1.3) 


Vaccination with GARDASIL may not result in protection in all 
vaccine recipients. (1.3)

GARDASIL has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity."


6.2 Postmarketing Experience 
The following adverse events have been spontaneously reported during post-approval use of GARDASIL. Because these events were reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not possible to reliably estimate their frequency or to establish a causal relationship to vaccine exposure. 

Blood and lymphatic system disorders: Autoimmune hemolytic anemia, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, lymphadenopathy. 
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders: Pulmonary embolus.
Gastrointestinal disorders: Nausea, pancreatitis, vomiting.
General disorders and administration site conditions: Asthenia, chills, death, fatigue, malaise. 
Immune system disorders: Autoimmune diseases, hypersensitivity reactions including anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions, bronchospasm, and urticaria.
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders: Arthralgia, myalgia.
Nervous system disorders: Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, dizziness, Guillain-Barré syndrome, 
headache, motor neuron disease, paralysis, seizures, syncope (including syncope associated with tonicclonic movements and other seizure-like activity) sometimes resulting in falling with injury, transverse myelitis. 
Infections and infestations: cellulitis.
Vascular disorders: Deep venous thrombosis.

http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/g/gardasil/gardasil_pi.pdf

Mississippi Baby Cured of HIV?

Read this quote from The Huffington Post website:

"A doctor gave this baby faster and stronger treatment than is usual, starting a three-drug infusion within 30 hours of birth. That was before tests confirmed the infant was infected and not just at risk from a mother whose HIV wasn't diagnosed until she was in labor.

"I just felt like this baby was at higher-than-normal risk, and deserved our best shot," Dr. Hannah Gay, a pediatric HIV specialist at the University of Mississippi, said in an interview.

That fast action apparently knocked out HIV in the baby's blood before it could form hideouts in the body. "

Read this quote from the Citynews Toronto website:

"During a conference on retroviruses and opportunistic infections in Atlanta, scientists said they believe early intervention with three anti-viral drugs was key to the outcome.

The two-year-old girl began treatment within 30 hours of her birth after doctors diagnosed her mother as HIV-positive days before she went into labor.

Read this quote from BBC News:

"...the case of the Mississippi baby involved a cocktail of widely available drugs, known as antiretroviral therapy, already used to treat HIV infection in infants.

It suggests the swift treatment wiped out HIV before it could form hideouts in the body."

Read this quote from the New York Times:

"Some outside experts, who have not yet heard all the details, said they needed convincing that the baby had truly been infected. If not, this would be a case of prevention, something already done for babies born to infected mothers.

“The one uncertainty is really definitive evidence that the child was indeed infected,” said Dr. Daniel R. Kuritzkes, chief of infectious diseases at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

One hypothesis is that the drugs killed off the virus before it could establish a hidden reservoir in the baby.

Now, read these disclaimers from package inserts for common HIV tests:

"A Reactive result by Uni-GoldTM Recombigen® HIV suggests the presence of anti-HIV-1 antibodies in the specimen. Uni-GoldTM Recombigen® HIV is intended as an aid in the diagnosis of infection with HIV-1. AIDS and AIDS-related conditions are clinical symptoms and their diagnosis can only be established clinically."

"EIA testing alone cannot be used to diagnose AIDS, even if the recommended investigation of reactive specimens suggests a high probability that the antibody to HIV-1 is present. [...] At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence and absence of HIV-1 antibody in human blood." 

"Do not use this kit as the sole basis of diagnosing HIV-1 infection" (HIV-1 Western Blot Kit, Epitope, Inc., Organon Teknika Corporation PN201-3039 Revision #8)

"Apparently"? "Suggests"? "Believe"? "Hypothesis"? Is this really scientific evidence?

Wasn't diagnosed 'until' she was in labor or 'days before' she was in labor? What exactly are the facts here?

Be careful how you 'interpret' things and Question everything!