-Caveat Lector- Army Times April 23, 2001 Pg. 61 Article Misled Service Members I was very disappointed with your April 9 "Shots in the Dark" article. Its "tabloid-like" treatment of a vitally important issue was misleading and the "facts" presented were old news, already disproved in other writings and congressional testimony - some in your own earlier issues. I have always thought of the Times as a professional source of information for people in uniform. This article's innuendo, misinformation and misleading headlines contradict this opinion. The article claims the Pentagon doesn't want troops to know details about anthrax vaccine adsorbed, or AVA. If this were so, DoD would not have put massive numbers of documents dating back to the 1950s on the program's Web site: <http://www.anthrax.osd.mil> The questions raised in the article have been repeatedly addressed to the satisfaction of the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Disease Control, civilian experts and multiple independent panels. Why not inform readers that civilian physicians on the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices found AVA to be safe and effective in June 2000? Or report on the Institute of Medicine's two hearings on scientific evidence underlying AVA or on its report dispelling the squalene myth? Why not explain the historic role of civilian scientists on the Armed Forces Epidemiological Board, who have safeguarded troops' health for 60 years? Or the vaccine-affirming report by Oxford's evidence-based medicine group, the Cochrane Collaboration? Why not query America's true experts in our universities, who have devoted decades to understanding vaccines? If our program is so amiss, where is the uproar from America's real scientists? Why not ask America's universities how they would investigate vaccine safety, and then compare those recommendations to what DoD has already accomplished? Why not report on the 13 safety studies conducted so far among more than 366,000 AVA recipients? Why not a more objective treatment of the Brachman inhalational/cutaneous human study with more than 1,100 participants and the nonhuman primate studies with aerosolized anthrax challenges? Why not inform your readers that the FDA has the authority to determine if AVA is used according to its label and has concurred with DoD policy? Where are the up-to-date quotes from FDA officials, our most experienced people in drug regulation and vaccine quality? Finally, if the Times helps mislead servicemen and women, causing them not to take a vaccine designed to protect them, where will its conscience be after their careers are damaged or lives endangered when they go into harm's way unprotected? Aerosolized anthrax is colorless, odorless and tasteless and is available for use by potential adversaries. If unprotected people breathe it, they will die. Why your paper is choosing to ignore expert opinions and mountains of scientific data is a mystery. In the 1899 Boer War, the British learned of a vaccine that would protect their force against deadly typhoid. Before they could administer it, an opposition group arose. Their leaders decided to make the shot voluntary. Only 14,000 people took it. More than 58,000 came down with typhoid. More than 9,000 died. Let us never duplicate that mistake! I led troops in Desert Storm and know firsthand that the enemy had anthrax weapons and was prepared to use them. No one should face that threat unprotected. I have taken the shots and encourage my troops to do likewise. After examining the evidence, I believe in its safety and efficacy. There are no 'shots' in the dark, no human guinea pigs, and there is nothing about the Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program that we don't want our people to know! Your periodicals have been too good for too long to be so misleading. Maj. Gen. Randall L. West, USMC Senior advisor to the deputy secretary of defense for chemical and biological protection, Washington Editor's Note: The article referred to appeared in the Current News Supplement, April 3, 2001. ================================================================= Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh, YHVH, TZEVAOT FROM THE DESK OF: *Michael Spitzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ~~~~~~~~~~~ The Best Way To Destroy Enemies Is To Change Them To Friends ================================================================= <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
