Post by Nugget on Aug 5, 2016 11:29:55 GMT -6
“Recently, the New England Journal of Medicine published the preliminary results of a large study of pregnant Colombian women infected with Zika. Of the nearly 12,000 pregnant women with clinical symptoms of Zika infections until March 28, no cases of microcephaly were reported as of May 2. At the same time, four cases of Zika and microcephaly were reported for women who were symptomless for Zika infections and therefore not included in the study itself.”
The four cases are consistent with the expected normal background rate of microcephaly–2 in 10,000. Also, there have been almost 50 microcephaly cases in Colombia up to April 28 with no connection to the Zika virus.
The mathematical analysis demonstrates that there are at least 60,000 Zika-infected pregnancies in Colombia, yet the near absence of microcephaly calls for a renewed investigation into the cause of this birth defect.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) have already concluded that Zika is a cause of microcephaly. However, the NEJM acknowledges that no experimental evidence exists yet to support that conclusion. Also, “no flavivirus has ever been shown definitively to cause birth defects in humans, and no reports of adverse pregnancy or birth outcomes were noted during previous outbreaks of Zika virus disease in the Pacific Islands.”
In keeping with the spirit of scientific inquiry, all avenues should remain open in determining the cause of the microcephaly outbreak in Brazil. Evidence could build for the Zika virus link, but scientists are insisting that the insecticide pyriproxyfen should also be explored as a possible cause.
In February we reported that doctors in Brazil and Argentina sounded the alarm over pyriproxyfen, which is used for mosquito control by targeting the larval stage. This chemical was sprayed in the areas most affected by microcephaly, but more significantly, was added to drinking water in the Brazilian state of Pernambuco.
The doctors’ report was widely lambasted in the corporate media, but that has not diminished the possibility of a link between pyriproxyfen and microcephaly. The NECSI, which published the new study on Colombia, has provided a comprehensive review of the facts leading to this hypothesis.
“Pyriproxyfen acts as a larvicide by interfering with the development of mosquito larvae. It may unintentionally do the same in humans. Its structure mimics the role of juvenile hormone, which has been shown to correspond in mammals to a number of molecules including retinoic acid, a metabolite of vitamin A, with which it has cross-reactivity. The application of retinoic acid during development has been shown to cause microcephaly. Methoprene, another juvenile hormone analog that was approved as an insecticide based upon tests performed in the 1970s, has also been shown to bind to the mammalian retinoid X receptor, and to cause developmental disorders in mammals. Isotretinoin is another example of a retinoid causing microcephaly in human babies via maternal exposure and activation of the retinoid X receptor in developing fetuses.”
The four cases are consistent with the expected normal background rate of microcephaly–2 in 10,000. Also, there have been almost 50 microcephaly cases in Colombia up to April 28 with no connection to the Zika virus.
The mathematical analysis demonstrates that there are at least 60,000 Zika-infected pregnancies in Colombia, yet the near absence of microcephaly calls for a renewed investigation into the cause of this birth defect.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) have already concluded that Zika is a cause of microcephaly. However, the NEJM acknowledges that no experimental evidence exists yet to support that conclusion. Also, “no flavivirus has ever been shown definitively to cause birth defects in humans, and no reports of adverse pregnancy or birth outcomes were noted during previous outbreaks of Zika virus disease in the Pacific Islands.”
In keeping with the spirit of scientific inquiry, all avenues should remain open in determining the cause of the microcephaly outbreak in Brazil. Evidence could build for the Zika virus link, but scientists are insisting that the insecticide pyriproxyfen should also be explored as a possible cause.
In February we reported that doctors in Brazil and Argentina sounded the alarm over pyriproxyfen, which is used for mosquito control by targeting the larval stage. This chemical was sprayed in the areas most affected by microcephaly, but more significantly, was added to drinking water in the Brazilian state of Pernambuco.
The doctors’ report was widely lambasted in the corporate media, but that has not diminished the possibility of a link between pyriproxyfen and microcephaly. The NECSI, which published the new study on Colombia, has provided a comprehensive review of the facts leading to this hypothesis.
“Pyriproxyfen acts as a larvicide by interfering with the development of mosquito larvae. It may unintentionally do the same in humans. Its structure mimics the role of juvenile hormone, which has been shown to correspond in mammals to a number of molecules including retinoic acid, a metabolite of vitamin A, with which it has cross-reactivity. The application of retinoic acid during development has been shown to cause microcephaly. Methoprene, another juvenile hormone analog that was approved as an insecticide based upon tests performed in the 1970s, has also been shown to bind to the mammalian retinoid X receptor, and to cause developmental disorders in mammals. Isotretinoin is another example of a retinoid causing microcephaly in human babies via maternal exposure and activation of the retinoid X receptor in developing fetuses.”
I think we all have doubts as to whether or not the truth is being manipulated here. The fact that a whole lot of companies- from drug makers, researcher, chemical companies and exterminators stand to make a fortune on this in itself warrants close scrutiny.
I probably wouldn't be so mistrusting if we hadn't been lied to so many times in the past about the 'saftey' of government approved products, or that humans were deliberately used for experiments.
Could this be another experiment? History will eventually reveal the truth......