Saturday, May 26, 2007

BAYER CAUSES THE WORST TREATMENT DISASTER in the history of the British National Health System (NHS)!

PharmaGossip: "The worst treatment disaster in the history of the NHS"

1,757 PEOPLE DIED and Many More Are Terminally Ill - Infection risk of imported blood 'known in 70s' – GUESS WHO is Responsible?

….. Following the scandal dubbed the "worst treatment disaster in the history of the NHS" by Labour peer Lord Winston.”

“* 'Lost' documents emerge, public inquiry told
* Health department set to release more information

All material quoted from “Original Source and PharmaGossip”: Sarah Boseley, health editor Saturday May 26, 2007 The Guardian

"More details emerged last night of the way government advisers handled the haemophilia scandal which saw thousands of patients infected with imported blood. Yesterday the Guardian revealed that the Department of Health was warned of the HIV danger from US blood products in 1983, but its advisers on the Committee on the Safety of Medicines decided not to ban imported blood for fear the UK would not have sufficient supplies. Now, campaigners who have finally won the right to a public inquiry, say they have discovered evidence that the government also knew that there was a risk of patients contracting the potentially lethal virus hepatitis C in blood products imported from the US as early as the 1970s. Years after the government said documents relating to the safety of the UK's blood supply had been destroyed; a public inquiry conducted by Lord Archer of Sandwell has been told by the Department of Health that most have resurfaced. Among 5,000 documents being made available to the inquiry are papers relating to the dangers of hepatitis C in blood collected from paid US donors. One of the documents, summaries of which have been placed in the library of the Palace of Westminster, contains minutes of a meeting of the Medical Research Council on February 12 1979, which discussed the possible contamination of US blood products with a virus known only then as "non A, non B hepatitis" which is now identified as hepatitis C. "In agreeing that post-transfusion hepatitis was rare in the UK, concern was expressed about the continued use of commercial plasma products, many of which were produced in the US and carried a high risk of transmitting non A, non B hepatitis," it says. Haemophiliacs were at greatest risk of infection from the virus because of their need for regular blood transfusions. Carol Grayson, whose husband Peter Longstaff died in April 2005 after contracting both hepatitis C and HIV from contaminated blood products, is among those who have campaigned to get to the bottom of what the government knew and when. She says the government has never acknowledged that blood products from the US carried a higher risk of hepatitis C than those sourced from the UK. Yet blood products from the US were more dangerous, campaigners say, for several reasons - the system for paying donors and collecting blood from prisoners meant a higher risk of infections. The US also pooled huge numbers of blood donations which meant that large quantities of blood products could be infected from a few virus-carriers. Mrs. Grayson has unearthed a document suggesting the British authorities knew of the hepatitis danger as early as 1975. That year Dr J Garrott Allen, a surgeon from Stanford University in California, who had studied hepatitis in post-transfusion patients, wrote to the head of BPL, in charge of Britain's blood supply. The United States Department of Health said they were about to release 1,700 more documents to add to more than 5,000 they have already made available to the Archer inquiry. A spokeswoman said: "We are not trying to hide anything. HIV was not the problem then that we now know it is and hepatitis C didn't even have a name. It has to be seen in that context."


"Bayer complied with all regulations in force in the relevant countries based on the amount of scientific evidence available at that time. The decisions that the company made 20 years ago should not be judged by the same standards of scientific knowledge available now, the statement said." End quote.

I respond:

Bayer's explanation that their behavior was consistant with the scientific knowledge OF THE TIME, doesn't really hold water with reality, and social justice.

"Bayer complied with all regulations in force in the relevant countries based on the amount of scientific evidence available at that time." - 5-2007, Bayer Spokesperson.

Is this comment, also the empirical rationalization f or making the poison gas for the Nazi Concentration Camps during and preceding WWII? I guess that Nazi medical torture (experiments) would also fall under the following explanation: "Bayer complied with all regulations in force in the relevant countries based on the amount of scientific evidence available at that time." Jews as sub-humans? Yes, that was also the scientific evidence available in Nazi days.

Please see HERE for PROOF that "Bayer played a decisive role in human experiments with deadly outcomes during the Third Reich."
I disagree strongly with this comment made recently by Bayer.

I believe that society has to hold companies responsible for their BEHAVIOR NO MATTER WHAT were THE "SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS" OF THE TIME (Jews as Laboratory Rats?)

Black Kitty Sets out a Dare for Bayer... hey that rhymes... dare for bayer.... hahaha
BAYER COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE WHO READS HEALTH BLOGS FOR MONEY, PLEASE REPLY HERE in my BLOG COMMENTS a statement about your company's involvement with the Nazi's and their role in the Holocaust? And how you thought "that killing Jews and many other people were the standards of the time?" I guess it was the standard to use slave labor and kill your workforce!

I would also LIKE BAYER TO DEFEND THE FIRST, PRECEDENT SETTING USE OF LABOR SLAVES PRIOR TO WORLD WAR I. Bayer forced Jews and other Europeans to work at their companies for free and at the costs of employee health and life. I would LOVE to understand how that STANDARD maps into today's thinking at your company.

In this Black Kitty OPINION, Bayer HAS NO SOUL, and the company, even in its current incarnation does not care at all for life; rather they seem to care only about profit for their shareholders, and lets not kid ourselves, the gold lined pockets of the top leadership of Bayer.

Bayer certainly does not care for those individuals who are either Jewish, physically or mentally ill or just not those people we like. Bayer had a policy of slave labor like many other European companies during WWI and WW2.

It is ironic, that a company owned by Germans who caused so much evil and hurt to humans over time, is CONTINUING TO CAUSE DEATH?

Anyone who does NOT KNOW the connection between Bayer, Exxon and the Nazi Death Camps (BTW, Bayer MADE THE POISON FOR THE GAS CHAMBERS) should read up on it in a very seriously footnoted and documented history Magazine Potshotzine #19 . By Clicking you can order copies of the magazine (I highly recommend it) or just READ UP on Bayer’s role in Genocide and the World Wars (also Exxon's Role :)).

Thank you so much in advance for providing me and family WITH AN APOLOGY, for your role in the deaths of my family members, and the genocide.

"Keep tabs on YOUR rulers, cause they got tabs on you" – Happy Birthday OPA.


Anonymous said...

My little sister recently found out she is hep c +. She received an infusion of platelets during a hospitalization for open heart surgery in 1982. She was 3 years old. We are devastated.

Pharma Giles said...

Hi BK..

I'm no Bayer fan but from the info available I can't see the link between Bayer and the UK event PG is referring to. The comment Aubrey Blomsohn made that prompted the tetchy (and as you say, oh so wrong) response from the Bayer wonk was about an unrelated event, I think.

Everything else you say is spot on though...

Dr. BK said...

Dear PG,

I have added more explanation to address your excellent comments.

Hey Cheers! I really love you :)