Blowing the Whistle at the FDA, Jan 2001, exposing Dearborn and how OspA causes immunosuppression rather than, "was a vaccine."
 


01 Oct 2017

Home


File List, RICO

1988 Steere says Lyme is like a B cell leukemia

Assoc Blogs-n-Webs:
TruthCures.org
badlymeattitude.com/
immune2lies.com/
researchfraud.com/
may12.org
meadvocacy.org/
truthbetoldx81
lymecryme
CrymeDiseaseNorway
crymedisease
theothersideofthestretcher
rjspiritualityandtuth
LymeTruthSite

JC-LilnkedIn
KD-Linkedin.com
LD-LinkedIn
JC-academia.edu

KD-academia.edu

 


CDC "SPIDER"

Fungal Exosomes Inhibit Apoptosis

IDSA: "Vaccines serve the mfgs, not their victims"

RICO_filed_USDOJ

BlumenthalAntiTrust Lawsuit

Exosomes, Blebs

Spirochetal_Dementia


PDFs
CDC Admits Fraud, 2016
Dattwyler, 1988
Golightly, 1988
Dressler, 1994
BarbourFish, 1993
Dearborn, 1994
BarbourFishpdf.pdf
 

Pathogenic Fungi

Bush's warcrimes, Oct 2000

Trainer

170708

 

 

If Wormser says that chronic Lyme doesn't exist, then how can he be sued for exacerbating chronic (dormant) Lyme?  The issue is the immune-suppression outcomes that Gary Wormser knew about, but of course said nothing about to the public, because to do so would be civil and humane.
 

Gary Wormser reporting the blunting of the immune response in vaccinated animals:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10865170?ordinalpos=5&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

"OspA interferes with the response of lymphocytes to proliferative stimuli including a blocking of cell cycle phase progression."


 

Given that LYMErix lawsuits are ongoing as of 2006, this is 
an important factor.


Lyme vaccine victim Fichter sues Gary Wormser, NYMC/Westchester, and 
Connaught for $1.2B for vaccine adverse effects.
Lyme vaccine victim Schettini sues for $22M.

Named in suit:
Gary Wormser
Robert Nadelman
Arthur Weinstein
Cynthia Aranell

Full patient names:
Marvin Fichter, Yorktown Heights, NY
Settled out of court for undisclosed sum around 2002.
Alison Schettini, Cortlandt Manor, NY
Albert Gambino, Southbury, CT
Source: Newsday, June 15, 1997



Patient sues SmithKline Beecham for $105M for vaccine adverse effects  (Steere lead investigator) Ray Neville, dentist from Poughkeepsie.


Source: Newsday, June 15, 1997

1 of 1 DOCUMENT

           Janice L. Vesperman, Respondent, v. Gary P. Wormser et al.,
            Respondents, and Connaught Laboratories, Inc., Appellant.

                              1999-09073, 2000-03135

              SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND
                                    DEPARTMENT


             283 A.D.2d 637; 725 N.Y.S.2d 361; 2001 N.Y. App. Div.
                                    LEXIS 5488

                            November 2, 2000, Argued

                              May 29, 2001, Decided



PRIOR HISTORY:  [***1]

In an action to recover damages for products liability and medical
malpractice, the defendant Connaught Laboratories, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of (1) an order of the Supreme Court,  Westchester County
(Donovan, J.), entered August 24, 1999, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it and to preclude the plaintiff from introducing at trial certain expert testimony, and  (2) an
order of the same court entered February 24, 2000, as, upon renewal, adhered to so much of the determination in the order entered August 24, 1999, as denied that branch of its prior motion which was to preclude certain testimony of the plaintiff's expert witness.

CASE SUMMARY:


PROCEDURAL POSTURE: In action to recover damages for products liability and medical malpractice, defendant laboratory appealed order of Supreme Court, Westchester County (New York), which denied its motion for summary judgment and
its motion to preclude plaintiff from introducing certain expert 
testimony, and an order which adhered to so much of the prior order as denied a motion to preclude certain testimony of plaintiff's expert witness.

OVERVIEW: Plaintiff's decedent volunteered to participate in an  investigational study of an experimental vaccine for Lyme disease sponsored by defendant laboratory. Decedent had a prior history of Lyme disease. Shortly  after his second injection, decedent experienced several adverse effects,  including joint pain and scalp tenderness. The trial court properly denied defendant laboratory's

motion for summary judgment as plaintiff raised issues of fact regarding the
adequacy of the warnings provided by defendant laboratory to the defendant
doctor, the principal investigator of the study. In addition, there  were issues
of fact regarding defendant laboratory's vicarious liability for the acts and/or
omissions of other defendants.

OUTCOME: The appeals were dismissed. The first order was affirmed insofar as
reviewed.