Hour 3 - Dr. Judy Mikovits, PhD (molecular biologist) provides and update on Vaccines and Vaccinations, retrovirus, CDC corruption
2017-03-14 Hour 3 Judy Mikovits from Ernest Hancock on Vimeo.
Dr. Judy Mikovits, PhD
Judy testified on a lawsuit for Racketeering and conspiracy against the CA legislators who passed the SB277 mandating toxins be inoculated in their children under the guise of vaccination and she will re-cap her testimony...
Other references and webpages:
Judy's previous interviews on the Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock Radio Show: https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Guest-Page.htm?No=01359
Judy A. Mikovits, PhD has spent her life training to be a research scientist to honor her grandfather who died of cancer when she was a teenager. Dr. Mikovits earned her BA from University of Virginia and PhD in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology from George Washington University. In her 35-year quest to understand and treat chronic diseases, she has studied immunology, natural products chemistry, epigenetics, virology and drug development. In just over twenty years she rose from an entry-level lab technician to become director of the lab of Antiviral Drug Mechanisms at the National Cancer Institute before leaving to direct the Cancer Biology program at EpiGenX Pharmaceuticals in Santa Barbara, California where she had met and married David Nolde in 2000. There in 2006, she became attracted to the plight of patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Autism. In only five years she developed the first neuroimmune institute from a concept to a reality and is primarily responsible for demonstrating the relationship between immune based inflammation and these diseases. She has published over 50 scientific papers.
Dr. Judy A. Mikovits recently founded MAR Consulting Inc. with her collaborator Dr. Frank Ruscetti.
She can be contacted at:
MAR Consulting Inc.
300 Carlsbad Village Drive
Suite 108A Box 132
Carlsbad, CA 92008or
MAR Consulting Inc. website:
MAR Consulting Inc., led by Drs. Frank Ruscetti and Judy A. Mikovits, seeks to understand complex and innovative biological issues to yield unbiased integrated, cutting-edge information for patients and physicians impacted by some of the most challenging chronic diseases. Utilizing their combined 75 years experience in tumor biology, immunobiology of retroviral-associated inflammatory diseases, cancer, stem cell biology, hematopoiesis, and drug development, MAR focuses on research projects, consulting (to patients doctors, academia, and industry) and lecturing without the restrictive authority of vested interest groups, following Thomas Jefferson's dictum: "Here we are not afraid to follow the truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate error so long as freedom is left free to combat it."
On July 22, 2009, a special meeting was held with twenty-four leading scientists at the National Institutes of Health to discuss early findings that a newly discovered retrovirus was linked to chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), prostate cancer, lymphoma, and eventually neurodevelopmental disorders in children.
When Dr. Judy Mikovits finished her presentation the room was silent for a moment, then one of the scientists said, "Oh my God!" The resulting investigation would be like no other in science.
For Dr. Mikovits, a twenty-year veteran of the National Cancer Institute, this was the midpoint of a five-year journey that would start with the founding of the Whittemore-Peterson Institute for Neuro-Immune Disease at the University of Nevada, Reno, and end with her as a witness for ?the federal government against her former employer, Harvey Whittemore, for Illegal campaign contributions to U. S. Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid.
On this journey Dr. Mikovits would face the scientific prejudices against CFS, wander into the minefield that is autism, and through it all struggle to maintain her faith in God and the profession to which she had dedicated her life. This is a story for anybody interested in the peril and promise of science at the very highest levels in our country.
Plague The Book: Teaser Trailer:
To order your copy of Plague: One Scientist's intrepid Search For the Truth about Human Retroviruses and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Autism, and Other Diseases Click on any of the links - Amazon.com Barnes & Noble.com IndieBound
TOPICS AND REFERENCES:
Physicians for Informed Consent...
PIC is the first physician organization dedicated to safeguarding informed consent in vaccination.
DOCTOR: UNITE WITH US
We Oppose Mandatory Vaccination Laws
SB277, the mandatory vaccination law for both private and public school attendance in California, went into effect July 1, 2016. Your membership is crucial to help amplify our physician voice and stop mandatory vaccination laws across the USA.
It is our responsibility as physicians to protect our patients.
Let's not let them down.
Join us and help make the world a better place.
What has PIC done?
PROVIDED 300 FAMILIES LEGAL GUIDANCE ON SB277
PROVIDED 100 HOURS OF LEGAL GUIDANCE TO PHYSICIANS
PROVIDED LEGAL ASSISTANCE TO SB277 LITIGATION
WROTE SUPPORT LETTER, SIGNED BY OVER 300 PHYSICIANS, FOR GATTO'S AB 2638
EDUCATED PHYSICIANS ABOUT IMMUNOLOGY VIA MONTHLY WORKSHOPS
Your boss could demand you get genetic testing and hand over the results, if this congressional bill becomes law
Get ready to open up and say "ahhhhhhhhhh."
Workers participating in so-called workplace wellness programs reportedly could be ordered to get genetic testing — and hand over the results — by their employers or face financial penalties, if a bill being pushed by congressional Republican becomes law.
That bill, passed by a House committee Wednesday, could end up as part of the second phase of planned Obamacare-replacement legislation, the STAT health-care news site reported Friday.
"What this bill would do is completely take away the protection of existing laws," Jennifer Mathis, director of policy and legal advocacy at the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, told STAT.
The controversy revolves around disputes over the meaning of a 2008 federal law, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, as well as over administrative interpretations of the Affordable Care Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
GINA, opponents of the new bill say, as a rule bars employers from insisting on genetic testing of their workers, except if that testing is offered as part of a wellness program and is voluntary on the part of the worker.
But the new bill, sponsored by Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C if passed into law, would make it clear that employers who offered wellness programs, and require genetic testing as part of them, can legally charge workers who refuse the tests a higher price for health insurance than workers who accept the test.
Wellness programs, whose efficacy has been challenged, are intended to improve employee health by methods including screening for medical conditions and promoting smoking cessation.
CLICK HERE for the rest of the article
Debating DNA Collection
by Sarah B. Berson
DNA helps law enforcement investigate and prosecute crime, but the new trend of preconviction DNA collection raises serious Fourth Amendment issues for the criminal justice community.
©iStockPhoto.com (see reuse policy).
Policymakers are increasingly coming to grips with legal issues related to taking DNA samples from people who have not been convicted of crimes.
The practice of taking DNA samples from convicted criminals is now largely uncontroversial. The courts have routinely upheld laws that authorize DNA collection from both current and former convicts, and the resulting databases of DNA have become powerful tools to analyze forensic evidence collected from crime scenes. The databases help to clear innocent suspects and redirect law enforcement officials away from unproductive investigations. They also help to convict guilty criminals and clear the wrongfully convicted.
A trend that is causing significant debate is gathering DNA samples from people who are arrested but not convicted. About 20 states and the federal government have passed legislation that requires DNA collection upon arrest. This legislation has raised concerns that crime laboratories may be unable to manage an influx of samples from a new source and that preconviction DNA collection may violate Fourth Amendment privacy guarantees.
Some people worry that collecting DNA creates the potential for abuse of genetic information stored in databases. Others point out that the federal and state privacy laws and penalties that apply to crime labs are stringent — far more stringent than the rules governing private entities that collect blood and saliva for medical or insurance purposes. Additionally, crime labs process only the DNA that applies to human identification. They do not process DNA that identifies predisposition to diseases. Indeed, most crime labs are incapable of doing that kind of DNA processing.
Proponents of laws to collect DNA from arrested persons say these laws are no different from the long-standing, routine practice of taking fingerprints of arrested suspects. Law enforcement officers run fingerprints against national databases to confirm a suspect's identity and learn of any outstanding warrants against the person. Fingerprints remain on file unless a person makes a formal request to remove them. Proponents believe that taking DNA samples should be thought of in the same way and that the process will yield similar benefits.
See "The Growth of DNA Collection From Convicted Criminals."
Preconviction DNA Sample Collection
The DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005 requires that, beginning January 1, 2009, any adult arrested for a federal crime provide a DNA sample. The law also mandates DNA collection from persons detained under the authority of the United States who are not U.S. citizens or are not lawfully in the country.
Even before passage of the act, five states — California, Louisiana, Minnesota, Texas and Virginia — had statutes that mandated collecting DNA from people arrested for various qualifying offenses. Although some states limit preconviction DNA collection to violent offenses or sex crimes, other states include all felonies, and some extend the requirement to misdemeanors as well. States' legislation requiring preconviction
DNA collection varies. Variations include the types of crimes for which samples are collected, applicability of the law to juveniles and procedures for deleting profiles. Some state laws have faced Fourth Amendment challenges in court.
CLICK HERE for the rest of the article
HHS secretary expresses concern on bill allowing employers to demand genetic tests
ALEX WONG/GETTY IMAGES
By ANDREW JOSEPH @DrewQJoseph
MARCH 13, 2017
President Trump's top health official suggested that there would be "significant concerns" with a House bill that would allow companies to require employees to undergo genetic testing, but said the administration had not yet examined the issue.
Tom Price, the secretary of Health and Human Services, was asked about the bill on NBC's "Meet the Press" over the weekend.
"I'm not familiar with the bill, but it sounds like there would be some significant concerns about it," Price said. "If the department's asked to evaluate it, or if it's coming through the department, we'll be glad to take a look at it."
CLICK HERE for the rest of the article