May 22, 2016 | Posted by Ricky Riley
On Friday’s episode of PBS NewsHour, in the latest installment of their “Broken Justice” series, attorney and activist Bryan Stevenson talks about mass incarceration and his Equal Justice Initiative that advocates for prison reform in the U.S.
Stevenson tells NewsHour that many states have fallen short in their effort to make amends for damage to Black communities caused by mass incarceration. The increase in probation and parole supervision are not the proper fixes needed, he said.
In Stevenson’s interview, he goes on to say:
“Well, I think it’s a continuation of using crime narrative to control social and political dynamics that can’t be controlled in more legitimate ways.
And we created this so-called war on drugs, and we targeted people of color, and we got everybody to buy into the fact that if we don’t put these dangerous people into jails and prisons, we are non-safe. And that’s how we went nationwide from a prison population of about 300,000 in the 1970s to 2.3 million today. And now we have the highest rate of incarceration in the world …
I think people realize that we’re spending way too much money on jails and prisons. And I think that’s true in Alabama. It’s true nationwide. We went from $6 billion spent on jails and prisons in the United States in 1980 to $80 billion last year.”
You Might also like
By Elliot Booker — 2 years agoBy
Colin Kaepernick — the former San Francisco 49ers quarterback who was blackballed by the NFL for taking a knee against police brutality — is making a far-reaching impact on society off the field. Kaepernick, who sparked a protest movement against police violence against Black bodies, has moved the debate forward on racial justice for Black people.
In September of 2016, Kaepernick pledged that he would donate $1 million plus the proceeds of his jersey sales from the 2016 season to organizations that work in oppressed communities — $100,000 a month for 10 months. Most recently, he raised $10,000 per day for 10 days with his #10for10 campaign, with 10 of his friends selecting organizations he should donate to and matching his contribution.
As a part of the NFL player’s campaign, R&B singer Jhené Aiko and Chris Brown each donated $10,000 to the Southern California-based Schools on Wheels, a rolling schoolroom which offers tutorial services to the region’s growing homeless population. Homelessness has increased 23 percent in Los Angeles County in 2017 over the year before, and 20 percent in the city of Los Angeles.
Tennis legend Serena Williams contributed $10,000 to Imagine LA, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to ending the cycle of family homelessness and poverty.
Also accepting the #MillionDollarChallenge is the rapper T.I., who partnered with Kap to donate $20,000 to Trae Tha Truth’s Angel by Nature organization, a “boots on the ground” group that has provided relief to Houston post-Hurricane Harvey.
As part of Kaepernick’s campaign, Snoop Dogg gave $25,000 to Mothers Against Police Brutality, a Dallas-based group formed to unite mothers who have lost their children to police violence. “It’s no secret that Uncle Snoop Dogg has transcended into global mega-stardom and even though he’s busier than ever, our brother still finds time to give back to the Community in so many ways. Like a true OG, Uncle Snoop didn’t even flinch when I reached out to him about being part of my #MillionDollarPledge,” Kaepernick said. “With such an alarmingly disproportionate number of African American and Hispanic men and women killed by police, it’s obvious why Snoop chose this organization. Thank you, Uncle Snoop for everything that you have done, and have yet to do, in entertainment as well as the community. Much continued success to you my brother.”
Stephen Curry of the Golden State Warriors donated $10,000 to United Playaz, a violence prevention and youth development organization based in San Francisco. The organization provides vulnerable young people ”higher education, employment, and healthy living within a safe, nurturing, and collaborative environment.” Curry’s Warriors teammate Kevin Durant contributed to Silicon Valley De-Bug, a San Jose organization that uses storytelling and media creation to promote social justice.
Actor Jesse Williams gave $10,000 to Advancement Project, a “next generation, multi-racial” civil rights organization committed to dismantling and reforming “the unjust and inequitable policies that undermine the promise of democracy through the development of community-based solutions to racial justice issues.”
Nick Cannon and Joey Badass joined Kaepernick in donating $40,000 to Communities United for Police Reform, a New York-based campaign by members of the community, lawyers, researchers and activists to end discriminatory policing practices.
As the sidelined NFL player is taking a stand for social justice and putting his money where his mouth is, the NFL’s own “Let’s Listen Together” campaign — highlighting the league’s $89 million commitment to social justice and equality — has lost its luster. “The campaign will highlight the NFL’s commitment with TV spots, digital content and social media engagement. Hopefully, this will educate the masses, creating some sensitivity for those who need it and spark change,” wrote Jarrett Bell in USA Today. “But it also has the feel of top-shelf marketing and PR spin, with Kaepernick’s original message hijacked as part of an NFL crisis management strategy in the face of backlash from those who could care less.”
Meanwhile, a coalition of players who were handpicked by the NFL as a “safe” alternative to Kaepernick has splintered, as Howard Bryant of ESPN noted. Bryant wrote that the coalition was insulted by accusations it had sold out, and “the league had lured them with promises of social commitment and big money to cover for the real purpose of sabotaging their movement and ending the protests.” The failure of the NFL to sign Kaepernick is a scandal, claims Dave Zirin of The Nation, arguing that despite the self-promoted image of the league as a meritocracy, billion-dollar teams chose to fail rather than sign the athlete-activist this season.
Although he was blackballed and did not even play this past season, Kaepernick was named a finalist in the NFL Players Association’s Byron “Whizzer” White Community MVP award, along with Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Andy Dalton, Philadelphia Eagles defensive end Chris Long, Denver Broncos linebacker Von Miller and defensive lineman J.J. Watt of the Houston Texans. The winner of the award, which honors contributions to the community, will be announced Feb. 1 at the NFLPA’s Super Bowl news conference. The NFLPA will donate $100,000 to the winner’s favorite charity or his foundation, with the other finalists receiving $10,000 apiece. The award honors players for their contribution to the community and recognizes a player each week over the season. After the winner is chosen, the NFLPA will donate $100,000 to that player’s foundation or a charity of choice. The other four finalists receive $10,000 each for their charities or foundations.
The impact of Kap’s contribution to social justice was reflected in a recent cover of the New Yorker magazine, which depicted a kneeling Martin Luther King flanked by Kap and Michael Bennett of the Seattle Seahawks.
In October, Kaepernick filed a right-to-work lawsuit against the NFL for collusion. Proceedings in the case began in early January. Kaepernick alleges the NFL conspired to keep him off the field — which is barred in the collective bargaining agreement — blackballing him for his political stance against the treatment of Black people at the hands of law enforcement. He points to the fact that there are 64 quarterback slots in the league, and several with lesser ability have been signed since he became a free agent. Kaepernick must prove the teams colluded, and many legal experts agree he was singled out for his politics, as Axios reported.
Colin Kaepernick currently ranks as the second most popular NFL player after Tom Brady, even while he is not currently playing for a team. His story is not done, but it is clear the athlete and activist already have left an indelible mark on the Black community, backing up his words with action, and challenging others to step up and contribute.Post Views: 498
By Elliot Booker — 4 years ago
I SPEAK OF FREEDOM, 1961
For centuries, Europeans dominated the African continent. The white man arrogated to himself the right to rule and to be obeyed by the non-white; his mission, he claimed, was to “civilise” Africa. Under this cloak, the Europeans robbed the continent of vast riches and inflicted unimaginable suffering on the African people.
All this makes a sad story, but now we must be prepared to bury the past with its unpleasant memories and look to the future.All we ask of the former colonial powers is their goodwill and co-operation to remedy past mistakes and injustices and to grant independence to the colonies in Africa….
It is clear that we must find an African solution to our problems, and that this can only be found in African unity. Divided we are weak; united, Africa could become one of the greatest forces for good in the world.
Although most Africans are poor, our continent is potentially extremely rich. Our mineral resources, which are being exploited with foreign capital only to enrich foreign investors, range from gold and diamonds to uranium and petroleum. Our forests contain some of the finest woods to be grown anywhere. Our cash crops include cocoa, coffee, rubber, tobacco and cotton. As for power, which is an important factor in any economic development, Africa contains over 40% of the potential water power of the world, as compared with about 10% in Europe and 13% in North America. Yet so far, less than 1% has been developed. This is one of the reasons why we have in Africa the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty, and scarcity in the midst of abundance.
Never before have a people had within their grasp so great an opportunity for developing a continent endowed with so much wealth. Individually, the independent states of Africa, some of them potentially rich, others poor, can do little for their people. Together, by mutual help, they can achieve much. But the economic developmentof the continent must be planned and pursued as a whole. A loose confederation designed only for economic co-operation would notprovide the necessary unity of purpose. Only a strong political union can bring about full and effective development of our natural resources for the benefit of our people.
The political situation in Africa today is heartening and at the same time disturbing. It is heartening to see so many new flags hoisted in place of the old; it is disturbing to see so many countries of varying sizes and at different levels of development, weakand, in some cases, almost helpless. If this terrible state of fragmentation is allowed to continue it may well be disastrous for us all.
There are at present some 28 states in Africa, excluding the Union of South Africa, and those countries not yet free. No less than nine of these states have a population of less than three million.Can we seriously believe that the colonial powers meant these countries to be independent, viable states? The example of South America, which has as much wealth, if not more than North America, and yet remains weak and dependent on outside interests, is one which every African would do well to study.
Critics of African unity often refer to the wide differences in culture, language and ideas in various parts of Africa. This istrue, but the essential fact remains that we are all Africans, and have a common interest in the independence of Africa. The difficulties presented by questions of language, culture and different political systems are not insuperable. If the need for political union is agreed by us all, then the will to create it is born;and where there’s a will there’s a way.
The present leaders of Africa have already shown a remarkable willingness to consult and seek advice among themselves. Africans have, indeed, begun to think continentally. They realise that they have much in common, both in their past history, in their present problems and in their future hopes. To suggest that the time is not yet ripe for considering a political union of Africa is to evade the facts and ignore realities in Africa today.
The greatest contribution that Africa can make to the peace of the world is to avoid all the dangers inherent in disunity, by creating a political union which will also by its success, standas an example to a divided world. A Union of African states will project more effectively the African personality. It will command respect from a world that has regard only for size and influence.The scant attention paid to African opposition to the French atomic tests in the Sahara, and the ignominious spectacle of the U.N. in the Congo quibbling about constitutional niceties while the Republic was tottering into anarchy, are evidence of the callous disregard of African Independence by the Great Powers.
We have to prove that greatness is not to be measured in stockpiles of atom bombs. I believe strongly and sincerely that with the deep-rooted wisdom and dignity, the innate respect for human lives, the intense humanity that is our heritage, the African race, united under one federal government, will emerge not as just another world bloc to flaunt its wealth and strength, but as a Great Power whose greatness is indestructible because it is built not on fear, envy and suspicion, nor won at the expense of others, but founded on hope, trust, friendship and directed to the good of all mankind.
The emergence of such a mighty stabilising force in this strife-worn world should be regarded not as the shadowy dream of a visionary, but as a practical proposition, which the peoples of Africa can, and should, translate into reality. There is a tide in the affairs of every people when the moment strikes for political action. Such was the moment in the history of the United States of America when the Founding Fathers saw beyond the petty wranglings of the separate states and created a Union. This is our chance. We must act now. Tomorrow may be too late and the opportunity will have passed, and with it the hope of free Africa’s survival.
From Kwame Nkrumah, I Speak of Freedom: A Statement of African Ideology (1961)
Post Views: 431
By Elliot Booker — 3 years ago
Just as Black Men were targeted and injected with drugs for the Tuskegee Experiment, and Black Women in the U.S. and other countries injected, some forcibly with contraceptive drug Depo-Provera. We must start understanding what and whom we are dealing with. Please read the article and leave comments.
Minority Report: A Covert CDC Program Inoculated Black Babies with Deadly, Experimental Measles Vaccines
By Neil Z. MillerA Senior Scientist with the CDC, Dr. William Thompson, recently admitted that he and his co-authors intentionally omitted statistically significant information from their 2004 study that was published in the journal Pediatrics. The excluded data showed that “African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism.”(1,2) Dr. Brian Hooker, an independent scientist, re-analyzed the original CDC data and published his results confirming that “African American boys receiving their first MMR vaccine before 36 months of age are 3.4 times more likely to develop autism” when compared to African-American boys who receive MMR after 36 months of age.(3)
For more than 10 years, the CDC buried scientific evidence that young Black boys who receive the MMR vaccine have a significantly increased risk of developing autism. The CDC kept this crucial information confidential. The CDC refused to warn the public. The parents of Black babies were not provided with informed consent and their human rights were violated.
Concerned parents are now wondering whether this callous and potentially criminal behavior by the CDC is a one-time fluke or part of a larger pattern. Actually, the CDC and World Health Organization (WHO) have a history of violating the human rights of Black families by unethically experimenting on their babies with dangerous measles vaccines.
A CDC and WHO Catastrophe
In developing countries where children are malnourished and health care is inadequate, measles fatality rates between 5 and 10 percent are possible.(4-6) However, infants up to five months old are usually protected by maternal antibodies that they received during birth.(7-9) Standard measles vaccines do not work in babies under nine months of age.(10) Thus, authorities reasoned that if an effective vaccine could be developed for this vulnerable period — from 5 to 9 months of age — the measles death rate could be lowered.
Scientists pinned their hopes for a new measles vaccine on “high-titer” shots that are up to 500 times more potent than standard measles vaccines.(11) In the early 1980s, they tested one of these — the Edmonston-Zagreb (EZ-HT) strain — on Mexican and Gambian babies 4 to 6 months old.(12-15) During the next few years this high-titer measles vaccine was also tested on babies in Guinea-Bissau, Togo, Senegal, Haiti, and impoverished minority communities in Los Angeles, California.(16-22) The general public was informed that EZ-HT “produces a better immunological response than standard vaccines,” but a large, randomized controlled study published in The Lancet confirms that it was experimental and deadly.(17)
The Senegal study
From 1987 to 1989, scientists set up a research center near 30 remote villages in central Senegal. Their stated primary objective was to study the clinical efficacy of two high-titer measles vaccines: Edmonston-Zagreb (EZ-HT) and Schwartz (SW-HT).(17) However, researchers had already done several studies demonstrating that high-titer measles vaccines produce a better immunological response than standard vaccines when given to children younger than nine months and as early as four months.(13-16; 18-21) Therefore, scientists conducting the Senegal study might have had another agenda. In fact, an elaborate “mortality surveillance” was established to check safety, evaluate the vaccination strategy, and perform “independent checks on child deaths.”(17)
Researchers might have suspected the vaccine was dangerous when the results of earlier studies began to filter in. But they were probably reluctant to abandon their high-titer shot without testing it at least one more time to be sure. Senegal must have seemed ideal; the region was extremely remote, and less than 4% of the mothers who “consented” to the study were literate.(17)
To begin the study, researchers randomly assigned comparable children to three vaccine groups: a) EZ-HT administered at five months; b) SW-HT given at five months; and c) placebo at five months, followed by a standard low-titer measles vaccine at 10 months. All of the children were followed for up to three years. When the results were tabulated (using eight statistical procedures) it became clear that children who received the high-titer measles vaccines had significantly higher mortality at 41 months than children in the standard low-titer measles vaccine group. But they were not dying from measles. Most of the deaths were from other common childhood diseases. Apparently, the high-titer measles vaccines lowered overall immunity making the children fatally susceptible to diarrhea, dysentery, malaria, malnutrition, acute respiratory ailments, and other infectious diseases.(17)
Children who received the Schwartz strain (SW-HT) died of other diseases at a rate 51% higher than children who received a standard vaccine. There were 48 excess deaths for every 1000 babies vaccinated. Children who received the Edmonston-Zagreb strain (EZ-HT) died of other diseases at a rate 80% higher than children who received a standard vaccine. There were 75 excess deaths for every 1000 babies vaccinated.(17) Mortality remained consistently high in the second and third year after the EZ-HT vaccine was administered, whereas it declined substantially in the control group. One of every six babies vaccinated with EZ-HT died within three years.(17)
When it started to become clear that mortality in the high-titer vaccine groups was excessive, researchers refused to end the study. Instead, they sought out new babies to take part in more tests of their deadly shots.(17) They said, “these findings suggest a need to reconsider the use of high-titer measles vaccines early in life in less developed countries.”(17) [Author’s emphasis added.] The implication is that EZ-HT and EZ-SW may be okay for use in more developed countries. In fact, the Senegal researchers were willing to develop “other strategies to reduce mortality from early measles,” but apparently only “if these findings are confirmed in other settings.”(17)
The Los Angeles study
Vaccine researchers were unwilling to abandon their deadly Edmonston-Zagreb high-titer measles vaccine. Instead, they set up a study base in Los Angeles, California. In 1990, three years after the Senegal study was initiated, the first American Black and Hispanic babies were inoculated with EZ-HT.(22)
The World Health Organization (WHO) and the CDC knew about the high mortality associated with EZ-HT but considered the data “preliminary.”(23) Thus, the Los Angeles trials were permitted to occur. However, Dr. Joanne Hatim, an active proponent of vaccine safety, questioned the experimental study and was able to muster public outrage.(22) In 1991, the Los Angeles trials were halted, but not before nearly 1500 minority babies were experimented on.(24)
The CDC was dishonest about the Los Angeles study on several points, both before and after it was conducted:
1) The “informed consent” form provided to parents violated U.S. and internationally accepted ethical codes of conduct regulating human experimentation. The mothers and fathers of the babies who were used as research subjects were not informed that EZ-HT was unlicensed in the U.S. It was registered as an investigational new drug to be used for experimental and research purposes only.(22) Nor were they informed of earlier studies in Guinea-Bissau, Senegal and Haiti where the EZ-HT measles vaccine had shown a significant increase in mortality.(22) The Los Angeles babies were used as sacrificial guinea pigs because it was well established before they were injected that this experimental vaccine was a killer.(22)
2) Parents were told that millions of doses of the Edmonston-Zagreb vaccine had already been used in Europe. But the Los Angeles, California babies were not receiving that vaccine; they were being injected with the significantly more potent, high-titer shot.(22)
3) The CDC claimed that the communities targeted for the experimental vaccine were hardest hit by a recent outbreak of measles. Babies in Inglewood, East Los Angeles, and West Los Angeles received the shots.(24) However, according to data obtained from the Los Angeles County Department of Health, 14 of 24 regions within Los Angeles County had a greater number of confirmed measles cases than East Los Angeles, and 16 of 24 regions had more measles than West Los Angeles. Inglewood was ranked fourth. In other words, communities targeted for the experimental shots were not hardest hit by the recent outbreak of measles.(22)
The three regions chosen to receive the experimental shots were predominantly Black and Hispanic. In fact, 88% of the babies were minorities. Several mixed-race and White communities harder hit by the recent outbreak of measles were not chosen to participate in the study.(22
4) The CDC claimed that no children were adversely affected by the experimental vaccines. However, one baby died from a rare bacterial disease.(24) Furthermore, according to investigative journalist Keidi Obi Awadu, several children “experienced what parents are describing as long-term immune system impairment, seizures and other acute conditions consistent with vaccine-induced injury.”(22)
5) Dr. Stephen Hadler, director of the epidemiology and surveillance division of the CDC’s national immunization program, claimed that babies died in the earlier studies because they were malnourished and did not have access to adequate health care.(24) However, the Senegal study emphasized that “the three vaccine groups were comparable as regards various social, family, and health characteristics.”(17) If the babies vaccinated with high-titer shots were malnourished, so were the babies in the control group, yet mortality was 80% higher in the group receiving EZ-HT.(17) Regarding the claim that babies did not have adequate health care, the Senegal study also noted that “intensive medical care [was] provided during the project.”(17) For example, “Free drugs and medical services were provided to all children. As a consequence, overall mortality was substantially lower than during the three preceding years.”(17)
6) The Los Angeles study might have had a hidden agenda. In Senegal, researchers established that “there was no significant difference within the study group in mortality by sex,”(17) yet scientists claimed the vaccine had a “mysterious gender bias,” with girls more likely to suffer from the vaccine-induced delayed mortality.(23) E. Richard Stiehm, an immunologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, speculated that girls mount a superior immune response to the measles vaccine, then suffer from a hypersensitivity that leaves them immunologically disadvantaged later on. Kenneth Bart, director of the National Vaccine Program Office in Rockville, Maryland, provided a sociological explanation: boys and girls probably get sick equally in the years after vaccination, but girls receive less adequate health care causing them to die at greater rates. However, Lauri Markowitz, an epidemiologist with the CDC, thought there might be a biological explanation, and claimed there is no evidence that boys in the earlier studies were treated better than girls. To shed light on this gender enigma, Markowitz planned to measure antibody levels and immune cell counts in Los Angeles children who received the high-titer vaccine.(23) Is it possible that these babies’ lives were placed in jeopardy to satisfy scientific curiosity and settle an academic debate?
In 1990, WHO requested 250 million doses of the deadly EZ-HT measles vaccine to be dispensed throughout the world.(22) However, data from Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, and Haiti continued to confirm that EZ-HT doesn’t save lives — it increases mortality.(23) By June of 1992, the link was irrefutable; WHO called for a moratorium on use of the disputed vaccine.(23) By some estimates, this might have prevented 18 million baby deaths.(22) Four years later, the CDC issued a tepid letter of regret by declaring, “a mistake was made.”(24) Yet, the entire debacle was unnecessary. In the Senegal study conclusion, the authors refer to a Togo study that used a low-titer measles vaccine and produced a good immunogenic response at six months.(20)
Researchers also discussed another Senegal study where standard measles vaccines “were safe, even when given at 4-6 months.”(17) Furthermore, “since most complications of measles occur during the 2nd and 3rd weeks after onset, early treatment is possible.”(17) In fact, “a systematic treatment of complications in [the other Senegal study] reduced the case-fatality rate among children below three years of age by 78%.”(17) Thus, non-fatal options were available.
A top scientist at the CDC recently admitted that he and his co-authors omitted crucial information from a study that was published 10 years ago. The excluded information showed that “African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism.”(1,2) Less than 20 years before their study was published, the CDC tested deadly, experimental measles vaccines on African infants and then again on inner-city American babies. These examples provide strong evidence that the CDC is engaged in a pattern of cavalier, unethical and potentially criminal behavior whereby the human rights of Black families and minority children are being violated. You should trust the CDC and their measles vaccines, including MMR, at your own peril.
1. DeStefano F, Bhasin TK, Thompson WW, et al. “Age at first measles-mumps-rubella vaccination in children with autism and school-matched control subjects: a population-based study in metropolitan Atlanta.” Pediatrics 2004 Feb; 113(2): 259-66.
2. Press Release. “Statement of William W. Thompson, Ph.D., regarding the 2004 article examining the possibility of a relationship between MMR vaccine and autism.” August 27, 2014. www.morganverkamp.com
3. Hooker BS. “Measles-mumps-rubella vaccination timing and autism among young African American boys: a reanalysis of CDC data.” Translational Neurodegeneration 2014 Aug 8; 3: 16.
4. Henderson RH, et al. “Immunizing the children of the world: progress and prospects.” Bull WHO 1988; 66: 535-43.
5. Hayden GF, et al. “Progress in worldwide control and elimination of disease through immunization.” J of Pediatrics 1989; 114: 520-27.
6. Gold E. “Current progress in measles eradication in the U.S.” Infect Med 1997; 14(4): 297-300; 310.
7. Van Ginneken JK, et al. Maternal and Child Health in Rural Kenya. (London: Croom Helm, 1984).
8. Black FL, et al. “Geographic variation in infant loss of maternal measles antibody and in prevalence of rubella antibody.” American J. of Epidemiology 1986; 124: 442-52.
9. Garenne M, et al. “Pattern of exposure and measles mortality in Senegal.” J of Infectious Diseases 1990; 161: 1088-94.
10. WHO-EPI. “The optimal age for measles immunization.” Weekly Epidemiology Records 1982; 57: 89-91.
11. Job JS, et al. “Successful immunization of infants at 6 months of age with high dose Edmonston-Zagreb measles vaccine.” Pediatric Infect Dis J 1991 April; 10(4): 303-311.
12. Sabin AB, et al. “Successful immunization of children with and without maternal antibody by aerosolized measles vaccine. I. Different results with undiluted human diploid cell and chick embryo fibroblast vaccines.” JAMA 1983; 249: 2651-62.
13. Sabin AB, et al. “Successful immunization of children with and without maternal antibody by aerosolized measles vaccine. II. Vaccine comparisons and evidence for multiple antibody response.” JAMA 1984; 251: 2363-71.
14. Whittle HC, et al. “Immunisation of 4-6 month old Gambian infants with Edmonston-Zagreb measles vaccine.” Lancet 1984; ii: 834-37.
15. Whittle HC, et al. “Trial of high-dose Edmonston-Zagreb measles vaccine in The Gambia: antibody response and side-effects.” Lancet 1988; ii: 811-814.
16. Aaby P, et al. “Trial of high-dose Edmonston-Zagreb measles vaccine in Guinea-Bissau: protective efficacy.” Lancet 1988; i: 809-811.
17. Garenne M, et al. “Child mortality after high-titre measles vaccines: prospective study in Senegal.” Lancet 1991; 338: 903-7.
18. Whittle HC. “Effect of dose and strain of vaccine on success of measles vaccination of infants aged 4-5 months.” Lancet 1988; i: 963-66.
19. Khanum S, et al. “Comparison of Edmonston-Zagreb and Schwartz strains of measles vaccine given by aerosol or subcutaneous injection.” Lancet 1987; i: 150-53.
20. Tidjani O, et al. “Serological effects of Edmonston-Zagreb, Schwartz, and AIK-C measles vaccine strains given at ages 4-5 or 8-10 months.” Lancet 1989; ii: 1357-60.
21. Markowitz LE, et al. “Immunization of six-month-old infants with different doses of Edmonston-Zagreb and Schwartz measles vaccines.” NEJM 1990; 332: 580-87.
22. Awadu KO. Outrage! How Babies Were Used as Guinea Pigs in an L.A. County Vaccine Experiment. (Long Beach, CA: Conscious Rastra Press, 1996).
23. Weiss R. “Measles battle loses potent weapon.” Sci 1992 Oct. 23: 546-47.
24. Cimons M. “CDC says it erred in measles study.” L.A. Times (June 17, 1996).
Neil Z. Miller is a medical research journalist and the author of several articles and books on vaccines, including Vaccine Safety Manual for Concerned Parents and Health Practitioners.
http://www.blackisbackcoalition.org/2013/09/14/depo-provera-deadly-violence-against-women/Post Views: 559