NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/misc/activism/progress/6514

Text File | 1992-09-14 | 7.9 KB | 169 lines

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!rich
From: [e-mail] (John A Dinardo)
Subject: Part IV,  Doctors Secretly Inject Cancer Cells Into Patients
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: [e-mail]
Keywords: shades of Dr. Mengele, human medical experimentation
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 18:48:22 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 152

        I made the following transcript from a tape recording
        of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio station
               WBAI-FM (99.5)
               505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
               New York, NY 10018       [phone]

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
                        (continuation)
GARY NULL:
On the other hand, the truth of the matter is that the results of
this man's experiments were relatively trite, and did not even come
close to proving that people could be immunized against cancer.
They merely showed that healthy people have a capacity to reject
cancer cell transplants more easily than the already debilitated
cancer patient. In his own words, the summary of the study was
that, quote:

   "Human volunteer recipients showed a marked difference in their
    natural resistance to subcutaneous homeotransplanted cancer
    cells according to whether they are normal healthy adults or
    patients with advanced debilitating neoplastic disease."

Unquote. That's from his own study conclusions.

Well, how would you feel if you were a person who had cancer and
you were struggling to remain alive, and someone injected you with
more cancer, which caused a severe immune reaction?  There's no way
in the world for ANYONE, even today, to determine what would happen
to your body. There's not a man or a woman on the face of the Earth
who could make, with certainty, a statement that that would not
adversely affect you. No human being could make that statement.
As a scientist, I'm telling you it's not humanly possible. This man
played God. This man today is the head of one of the largest, if
not the largest bio-technology research center in the world. But
more on that tomorrow when I tell you about what his lab, his
private foundation released into the environment with their genetic
engineering. You see, some people don't like to change their ways,
as I will show you. But, aside from that -- aside from the
exaggerated importance that he placed on his work -- there is
another problem with his research. The whole idea of treating
people, quote:

   "is, of course, inconsequential whether these are cancer cells
    or not, since they are foreign, and rejected."

Unquote.  He hadn't seemed, from my perspective, to have the
slightest respect for what the human body is dealing with when it
is under severe immunological stress. This doctor and his colleagues
were so sure about their theory of rejection of the cancer cells
that, in a letter to the Director of Medicine at the Jewish Chronic
Disease Hospital, he openly admitted that, quote:

   "For two years, we have been doing [these] tests routinely on
    all post-operative patients on our gynecology service as a
    measure of immunological status. You asked me if I obtained
    consent from our patients before doing these studies. We do not
    do so at Memorial or James Ewing Hospitals ....."

Unquote.  However, suggesting that informed consent was irrelevant
in medical matters, he said, quote:

   "We do get signed permits from our volunteers at Ohio State
    Penitentiary. But this is because of the law-oriented
    personalities of these men, rather than for any medical reasons."

Unquote.  In a letter to a doctor, this researcher felt that there
was a gap in his research in that he had thus far only studied
cancerous and non-cancerous patients, and had not tested his
theories on patients with other debilitating diseases. Now, since
the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital specialized in the treatment of
these patients, he wanted a collaborative effort that would, quote:

   "permit evaluation of the immunological status of patients with
    chronic non-neoplastic diseases, as revealed by promptness of
    rejection of subcutaneous cancer cell homeographs."

Unquote.  Then he said that it wouldn't cost them [the patients]
anything. Now, the director over there at that particular research
department agreed to the collaboration between the Jewish Chronic
Disease Hospital and the scientist who was representing [Memorial]
Sloan-Kettering [Hospital] in this study. Other physicians at the
Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital, however, did not view the injection
of their patients with live caner cells with equal favor. At about
the same time that one of the scientists received this researcher's
letter proposing collaboration, a Doctor David Leichter, a
coordinator of medicine who was in charge of cancer therapy and
research at the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital was speaking to
this other doctor who had agreed to the experiment. [The other
doctor] described the proposed experiment to Leichter. And,
according to Leichter, asked him to, quote:

   "discuss taking over this project."    Unquote.

with this other researcher's associate from Sloan-Kettering --
a Doctor Arthur Levin. I also have that affidavit.  Far from being
enthusiastic about the project, Doctor Leichter told this other
doctor, quote:

   "Such a project would certainly require the informed consent of
    the patients on whom it would be done. And until such prior
    informed consent was obtained, there was absolutely no reason
    for me to meet with these doctors from Memorial Hospital; and
    further, that I did not believe that such consent could be
    obtained."

Unquote.  By informed consent, Leichter explained he meant, quote:

   "discussing the project with the patient, advising him/her of
    the dangers, if any, informing him/her of the agent to be used
    -- in this case, live cancer cells. It also means to me that
    the patient on whom the experiment is to be made must be
    mentally competent and aware of the full extent and dangers of
    such a project; and that such consent, to be legal and proper,
    would have to be obtained in writing."

Unquote.  Well, the problem of obtaining informed consent from the
patients was also foremost in the minds of two other hospital
coordinators who were approached by the one doctor who agreed to
the experiment. A Doctor Fersko [or Frisco], echoing Doctor Leichter,
told this other doctor there that, quote:

   "Since this project would require the prior informed consent of
    each patient, I thought that the project would never get off the
    ground because such consent, once the patients were informed
    of the nature and potential danger involved, would be impossible
    to obtain."

Unquote.  Again, I have an affidavit from Doctor Fersko for
[attesting to] that quote.  And a Doctor Aver Cagan[sp] was also
approached. According to Doctor Cagan, he was asked if he, quote:

   "would be interested in actually administering the injections
    into these chronically ill patients."

Unquote.  That's according to Doctor Cagan's affidavit. Cagan too
expressed doubts as to whether informed consent could be obtained,
and he said that the doctor at Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital who
wanted to do it with Sloan Kettering Hospital then asked him to
consider the study and, quote:

    ".... how the department could get credit for it."
                       (to be continued)
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

      If you agree that this story deserves broad public attention,
      please assist in its dissemination by posting it to other
      bulletin boards, and by posting hardcopies in public places,
      both on and off campus.

      John DiNardo