FAKE BOOBS AND BREASTMILK ("SOMETHING IS GETTING OUT OF THE BAG")

Michael R. Hugo, Esq. wrote in 1996:

"[I]n 1965, one Dow Corning scientist wrote 'we know that something is
getting out of the bag'...

"[B]y 1980, the manufacturers were aware that silicone gel would pass
through breast milk..."
http://consumerlawpage.com/article/vaccine.shtml


INCREDIBLY (reportedly) silicone breast implant manufacturers allege both
that silicone both HAS immune function and has NO immune function.  See
further excerpt of Attorney Hugo's 1996 article below.

ATTORNEYS:  See the very end of this post.  This reported silicone lying is
SORT of like how the authors of Williams Obstetrics allege that the dorsal
(woman-on-her-back) delivery position both opens and closes the birth canal.

PREGNANT WOMEN:  Dorsal and semisitting delivery CLOSE the birth canal - up
to 30%.  It is easy for you to allow your birth canals to OPEN the "extra"
up to 30% - but see BEWARE #1 and #2 at the very end of this post.  Talk to
your OB today.

My thanks to Ilena Rosenthal for posting Attorney Hugo's article about
silicone breast implants, quoted further below.

Further remarks below.

I wrote:

>> BREAST IMPLANTS CAN KILL COCKROACHES?
>>
>> Alexander, Hawes & Audet, LLP attorney Michael R. Hugo, Esq. writes:
<snip>
>> The
>> same liquid silicone found in breast implants succeeded in killing
>> cockroaches..."
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2872

Jenrose replied:

> A better question is how does silicone affect mammals?
>
> I am *not* arguing that breast implants are a good idea... hell, at 42 G,
> they are a pretty silly idea from this end of the spectrum. But to argue
> that something is harmful to humans *because* it is harmful to another
> life
> form, well, you need more detail and more info to connect those dots.
>
> Jenrose
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1&selm=1098086761./kmfbolS01u8im%2B9mvtwxw%40teranews

Jenrose,

You ask:  How does silicone affect mammals?

Better question:  How does silicone affect HUMAN mammals?

Ilena Rosenthal has been valiantly pointing out that silicone apparently
HARMS human mammals...

Ilena quoted Attorney Hugo and I quoted him as he was quoted by Ilena:

> Prior
> to the introduction of liquid silicone gel implants, women had liquid
> silicone injected directly into their breasts. These injections
> caused, in most if not all cases, severe complications. The liquid
> based silicone gel implant was intended to remedy the problems caused
> by direct injections of silicone.
>

Here is further relevant context of the attorney's article I quoted from
Ilena's post...

> ...they sold a medical device intended for
> long-term implantation in the human body without any testing to
> determine whether it was safe or defective. Indeed, the information
> they possessed raised serious questions about the safety of implants,
> but the companies elected to put profit before public safety. Contrary
> to the manufacturers' media oriented assertions, there was and is
> compelling scientific evidence that silicone breast implants cause
> atypical diseases in women -- diseases that can be seriously
> debilitating and come with tremendous cost to the individual and
> society. Most of this information comes from studies conducted by the
> manufacturers before implants were marketed. Moreover, the breast
> implant controversy is another tragic example of the way in which
> women have been injured by inadequately tested products.
>
> In 1962, Dow Corning Corp., a joint venture of the Dow Chemical Co.
> and Corning, Inc., introduced the first silicone breast implant. Prior
> to the introduction of liquid silicone gel implants, women had liquid
> silicone injected directly into their breasts. These injections
> caused, in most if not all cases, severe complications. The liquid
> based silicone gel implant was intended to remedy the problems caused
> by direct injections of silicone.
>
> These implants, promoted as being fit to last a lifetime, were
> constructed of a rubberized silicone shell surrounding a silicone gel
> which, in finished form, is 80 to 85 percent liquid silicone. By the
> late 1960s, silicone manufacturers were aware that this silicone gel
> would bleed out of the implants and migrate throughout the body.
> Indeed, in 1965, one Dow Corning scientist wrote "we know that
> something is getting out of the bag . . . ." And by 1980, the
> manufacturers were aware that silicone gel would pass through breast
> milk. The manufacturers never informed the public of these or other
> findings that raised further serious questions about the safety of
> implants.
>
> The chemical makeup of silicone gel implants was virtually identical
> to the chemical makeup of liquid silicone that was injected into the
> breasts of women. The known complications associated with liquid
> silicone injections included atypical immune diseases that the
> researchers at the time termed "human adjuvant disease."
>
> Silicone gel implants did not remedy the problems caused by direct
> injections, and even caused other equally serious problems. The shell
> was fragile; it permitted the silicone to leak out of the implant and
> into the womenıs bodies and rupture under normal use. The gel, largely
> made up of fluid, escaped from the shell and moved throughout the
> woman's body.
>
> Dow Corning was not alone in its discoveries. By the 1970s, all of the
> manufacturers had become aware of a growing leakage and rupture
> problem. Indeed, as plastic surgeons began to see complications in
> their patients -- complications that appeared remarkably similar to
> those seen with liquid silicone injections -- they expressed their
> alarm to the manufacturers.
>
> Notwithstanding these complaints, the manufacturers assured the
> plastic surgery community that its concerns were unwarranted. They
> repeatedly restated their position that silicone was biologically
> inert and was safe for use, despite having no long-term studies to
> support this claim.
>
> Shockingly, while making those representations, the leading
> manufacturer, Dow Corning, was engaged in a secret program, in
> conjunction with its parent Dow Chemical Co., to utilize liquid
> silicone as pharmaceutical drugs, vaccines, and insecticides. Indeed,
> in the late 1960s and early 1970s, Dow Corning conducted a series of
> research studies that concluded that silicone does stimulate the
> immune system. This is in contrast to the position they now assert
> that liquid silicone from their implants does not stimulate the immune
> system.
>
> At the same time, Dow Corning and Dow Chemical, to whom the other
> manufacturers looked for leadership, were also investigating the use
> of liquid silicone as insecticides, fungicides, and herbicides. The
> same liquid silicone found in breast implants succeeded in killing
> cockroaches. The public, and specifically the women who were being
> induced to purchase implants, were never told of these studies, nor
> the potentially toxic properties of the silicone.
>

My thanks to Ilena Rosenthal for working to alert the public about silicone
breast implant dangers all these years.

My thanks also to Michael R. Hugo, Esq., author of the article excerpted
above.

NOTE:  I apparently made a mistake when I said that Michael was with the law
firm of Alexander, Hawes & Audet.

See DPT (also: Breast implants can kill cockroaches?)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2872

Alexander, Hawes & Audet appears to have re-published Michael's article
saying,

"This article was first published by the Association of Trial Lawyers of
America in its 1996 Boston Convention Syllabus where it was discovered by
The Consumer Law Page..."
http://consumerlawpage.com/article/vaccine.shtml

Michael R. Hugo, Esq. appears to practice with Lopez Hodes at Faneuil Hall
Market Place, 3rd Floor
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
617.973.9777

I will copy him there via mhugo@lopez-hodes.com

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
todd@chiromotion.com

PS1  Ilena's website is:  http://www.humanticsfoundation.com/

PS2  PREGNANT WOMEN:  As indicated above, dorsal and semisitting delivery
CLOSE the birth canal - up to 30% - but it is easy for women to allow their
birth canals to OPEN the "extra" up to 30%.

To allow your birth canal to OPEN the "extra" up to 30%, just roll onto your
side at delivery or use hands-and-knees, kneeling, standing, squatting - use
anything but dorsal and semisitting as you push your baby out.  Talk to your
OB about this today.

BEWARE #1:  Some OBs let women "try" alternative positions but then move
women back to dorsal or semisitting (close the birth canal) for the actual
delivery.

BEWARE #2:  It is standard practice for OBs to move women back to dorsal or
semisitting (close the birth canal) when they start pulling with hands,
forceps and vacuums!

PROOF:  The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists/ACOG
Shoulder Dystocia video purports to show OBs how to open the birth canal
maximally when shoulders get stuck - which is an indirect admission that OBs
know they are closing birth canals routinely.  Unfortunately, as alluded to
above, the ACOG method for allowing the birth canal to open maximally
actually keeps it closed.

It may still be possible to purchase ACOG's video of this obvious felony:

See ACOG birth crime video evidence
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2300

As always, I am in favor of pardons in advance for MDs.  MDs are just
academic prime cuts forced through this culture's most powerful mental
meatgrinder - medical school.  As med students, MDs are TRAINED to perform
the felony.

PREGNANT WOMEN:  As indicated above, dorsal and semisitting delivery CLOSE
the birth canal - up to 30% - but it is easy for women to allow their birth
canals to OPEN the "extra" up to 30%.

MISUSE OF A MEDICAL DEVICE...

Attorney Richard Alexander (Alexander, Hawes & Audet) wrote of Attorney
Hugo:

"Mr. Michael Hugo...stands in the vanguard of American lawyers who are
advocates for the public good...To Mr. Hugo and his colleagues fighting for
the cause of women and children victimized by medical devices, vaccines and
drugs, our highest compliments for your vigilant efforts on the side of
human justice. Godspeed in your efforts to achieve justice for the victims
of corporate abuse. You are a tribute to the legal profession. "
http://consumerlawpage.com/article/vaccine.shtml

I'll copy Atty Richard Alexander via ra@alexanderlaw.com and via
waudet@alexanderlaw.com

ATTORNEYS (esp. Atty Hugo via mhugo@lopez-hodes.com):  The obstetric device
called the obstetric table is being grossly misused to position women on
their sacra thereby closing their birth canals up to 30%.

OBs really are keeping birth canals closed up to 30% as they gruesomely
(sometimese fatally) pull on tiny spines with hands, forceps and vacuums and
violently push with oxytocin and Cytotec.

It's time to stop them.

It's sort of a spinal manipulation emergency - MDs are lying and babies are
dying.

Then again, I must acknowledge (for my own sanity) that the corporate power
of MD puppetmasters is awesome - and it is unlikely that anyone can or will
do anything to stop the massive obstetric felony within my lifetime.

It feels very good to acknowledge this finally - I will do so regularly -
and hope I am wrong.

On the bright side, fortunately, the horrible obstetric wrong is being
righted a little at a time - on an individual-by-individual basis...

PREGNANT WOMEN:  Dorsal and semisitting delivery CLOSE the birth canal - up
to 30% - but it is easy for women to allow their birth canals to OPEN the
"extra" up to 30%.   See above.

And don't forget, when babies get stuck, OBs are KEEPING birth canals closed
as they gruesomely pull with hands, forceps and vacuums.  This is an obvious
obstetric felony.  See above.

Thanks for reading everyone.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
todd@chiromotion.com

This post will be archived for global access within 24 hours in the Google
usenet archive.  Search http:groups.google.com for "Fake boobs and
breastmilk ('something is getting out of the bag')"