Independent Lab ‘Confirms Viral DNA in Merck Vaccine’

by Christina Sarich
September 6th, 2014
Updated 09/06/2014 at 10:25 pm

Independent Lab Confirms Viral DNA in Merck VaccineMerck can say that Gardasil contains ‘no viral DNA’ all they want, but Dr. Sin Hang Lee had reported to the FDA just over two years ago that the vaccine contains fragments of DNA that shouldn’t be in something we give young women – so why is Gardasil still on the market?

After conducting extensive research, Dr. Lee found that in 100% of lab samples tested, fragments of HPV-11, HPV-16, and HPV-18 L1 DNA firmly attached to Merck’s proprietary aluminum adjuvant.

Even though SaneVax Inc reported their findings to the FDA, the controversial vaccine used to treat cervical cancer is still being sold, and the FDA states that ‘these fragments pose no health risk.’ Once again, the FDA has ignored science which proves that a drug created by a big pharmaceutical company is less than safe.

Dr. Lee also found that the HPV DNA fragments were not only bound to Merck’s proprietary aluminum adjuvant, but they had also adopted a non-B conformation, thereby creating a novel (new) chemical compound of unknown toxicity.

Furthermore, Non-B DNA conformations are known through Dr. Lee’s research to be associated with genetic abnormalities, as well as mutations which cause 70 serious diseases in human beings. Among them:

Follicular lymphomas

Polycystic kidney disease

Spermatogenic failure

Adrenoleukodystrophy

The FDA clearly should have investigated these claims by now, and at last put a temporary moratorium on Gardasil. But instead, the organization ignores the obvious possibility that Gardasil, as many have suspected, cause infertility problems and possibly even forms of cancer -the very disease that Gardasil is supposed to protect women against.

Instead of researching the possibility that the HPV vaccine was harming women, government officials and HPV vaccine supporters have been eager to discredit Dr. Lee’s research.

Fortunately, some industrious and intelligent people have come to Dr. Lee’s aid. Helen Petousis-Harris PhD, the Director of Immunisation Research and Vaccinology Immunisation Advisory Centre at The University of Auckland, gave a a public hearing on HPV vaccine safety in February 2014, in which she outlined the tactics of these agencies (through her own criticism) to discredit scientists that offer opposing facts to the Big Pharma propaganda line.

She argued that:

Dr. Lee’s tests were over-sensitive. (Interesting – if findings go a deeper level than the cursory three-week toxicity trials, they are considered aberrant).

No one else has replicated Dr. Lee’s findings. This is likely untrue, and what is more probable is that no one has been able to bring similar findings to the surface..

But, both of these ‘concerns’ were put to rest via data presented by Laurent Bélec at the 9th International Congress on Autoimmunity on March 26-30, 2014 in Nice, France. They published their findings in a paper titled, “Confirmation of the Creation of a Novel Molecule in Gardasil.”

“. . .Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection causes cervical cancer, a significant portion of anal, genital and oropharyngeal cancers, genital warts and recurrent respiratory papillomatosis. In June 2006, a prophylactic HPV vaccine (Gardasil®; Merck, NJ, USA) was licensed in the USA, with subsequent approval granted in the European Union. Gardasil® is a quadrivalent HPV protein-based vaccine containing genotype-specific L1 capsid proteins of HPV-16, HPV-18, HPV-6 and HPV-11 in the form of virus-like particles as the active ingredient, which are produced by a DNA recombinant technology in yeast.

Recently Lee SH showed that Gardasil® contained fragments of HPV-11 or HPV-18 DNA, evidenced by nested PCR, of unknown significance [J Inorg Biochem. 2012 Dec;117:85-92]. We herein looked by optimized single PCR in different batches of Gardasil® from France for HPV L1 DNA using MY09/MY11 degenerate and nondegenerate primers, for HPV E2 and E6 DNA genes, and for contaminating Saccharomyces cerevisiae DNA.

All amplified amplicons were sequenced and resulting FASTA sequences were analyzed by Genotyping software from NCBI. In-house quantitative single PCR using as external calibrator serial dilutions of HPV-16 DNA extracted from CaSki cell line allowed estimating the load of residual HPV DNA fragments in vaccine ampoules.

Preliminary data showed the presence of contaminating HPV L1 DNA in all tested different batches of Gardasil® vaccine from France. Our observations confirm independently and extend the previous observations by Lee SH, without using conflicting nested PCR detection possibly subjected to contamination. Persistence in muscle tissue of residual HPV DNA

Not only has another independent laboratory confirmed the findings of Dr. Lee in every Gardasil sample tested from France, this lab used a different and less ‘sensitive’ methodology to arrive at the same conclusion regarding Gardasil recombinant (genetically engineered) HPV DNA fragment contamination.

Co-authors

L. Belec1, H. Péré1, C. Fayard1.

1Microbiologie, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.”

Dr. Lee and Prof. Bélec and the SaneVax team indicate the need for further investigation for vaccine safety. Without even this minimum standard for vaccines, why should we trust the makers of the drugs or the agencies which allow for their distribution at all?

Other Popular Stories:

1. Vaccine Danger: Merck is Big Pharma’s Vaccine Monsanto
2. Merck Paid Legislators to Pass Mandatory Gardasil Vaccine Bill
3. 41 States Sell Out to Merck’s HPV Shot Gardasil Vaccine Lobbyists
4. Gardasil Vaccine Destroys Ovaries of 16-yr. Old Girl, Causes Infertility
5. FDA Rejects Merck’s Attempt to Expand Deadly Gardasil to Older Women
6. 49 Dead, Others Hospitalized After Gardasil HPV Vaccine

Read more: http://naturalsociety.com/independent-lab-confirms-viral-dna-merck-vaccine/#ixzz3DCAdUTjd 

Big Pharma strikes out at Hylands

On the 23rd of October, the FDA made the grand sweeping announcement that it was recalling Hylands Teething tablets.  Within an hour of this announcement making an appearance on Facebook I was bombarded by questions from several people. 
At first I was shocked and worried that it was a case of contamination with some terrible biological buggy or something equally horrifying- I mean, I'd given my 8 month old son 2 of Hylands Teething Tablets just a few hours before reading this news.  I quickly went directly to the FDA website to read the information, and immediately sighed in relief.  No danger- just the usual meddling by the FDA and Big Pharma into the business of the little guy.

But I'm really pissed about this now!!!  What if this puts Hylands out of business?  What if the FDA manages to have the teething tablets banned?!?  Now what the hell are we suppose to give our poor teething babies?!

Let me back up for a moment.  Do you know what "Hylands Teething Tablets" are?  They are a homeopathic remedy for ... you guessed it: teething.  They are an awesome product that I have used on all of my kids when they were cutting new teeth. (along with another homeopathic product by Boiron called "camilla"). To read more about Hylands homeopathic preparations for children you can visit their website.

In response to the FDA announcement Hylands has made this response:

Working with FDA, Standard Homeopathic Company Voluntarily Recalls Hyland’s Teething Tablets to Address Manufacturing Process

Los Angeles, October 23, 2010 – Standard Homeopathic Company, in consultation with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is voluntarily recalling its Hyland’s Teething Tablets. The company is initiating this recall in an abundance of caution due to an FDA investigation of its manufacturing facility. Hyland’s Teething Tablets are manufactured in the United States and distributed throughout North America.

The Hyland’s Teething Tablets UPC codes included in the recall are:

1. Hyland’s Teething Tablets, 125 tablets, UPC # 3 54973 75041
2. Hyland’s Teething Tablets, 250 tablets, UPC # 3 54973 75042
3. Hyland’s Teething Tablets, 125 tablets, UPC # 3 54973 75066
4. Hyland’s Teething Tablets, 50 tablets, UPC # 3 54973 75044
5. Hyland’s Teething Tablets, 145 tablets, UPC # 3 54973 75121
6. Hyland’s Teething Tablets, Clip Strip 6x125 tablets, UPC # 3 54973 35109

Adverse events have been reported but the FDA has said that a conclusive link has not been determined. The company, in working with the FDA, has identified manufacturing processes of Teething Tablets that can be improved to ensure uniformity in dosage. As a homeopathic product, Hyland’s Teething Tablets have a wide margin of safety that protects consumers from harm.

After in-depth analysis, a comprehensive review of the company’s adverse event report log, and more than 85 years of safe usage, the company is confident that Hyland’s Teething Tablets are safe for infants and toddlers.

In addition to the product recall, Standard Homeopathic Company is refining its production, packaging and testing protocols. Throughout the process, Standard Homeopathic Company will continue to closely monitor and evaluate the situation and consult with FDA.

Consumers that are concerned about the safety of the product may contact Standard Homeopathic Company for instructions on a refund or replacement product. For these instructions or information regarding how to return or dispose of the product, consumers should log on to www.hylandsteething.com/recall or call 1-877-496-5044 (Monday-Friday 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. Eastern Time, and Saturday-Sunday 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern Time).

“We initiated this voluntary recall to ensure our consumers know that their families’ safety and health are our top priorities,” said Mark Phillips, PharmD, President and Chief Pharmacist of Standard Homeopathic Company. “We are committed to maintaining and deserving the trust they have placed in Hyland’s. We have worked for 107 years to build relationships with our consumers. We intend to preserve that tradition of trust.”

Hyland’s Teething Tablets is a homeopathic product intended to provide temporary relief of teething symptoms in children that is sold over-the-counter (OTC) in retail outlets.

No other Standard Homeopathic Company products are affected by this recall.

Consumers who have medical concerns or questions should contact their healthcare provider. Any adverse reactions may also be reported to the FDA’s MedWatch Program by fax at 1-800-FDA-0178, by mail at MedWatch, FDA, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20852-9787, or on the MedWatch website at www.fda.gov/medwatch.

With over 100 years of experience in providing families with access to safe, natural, reliable medicines, Standard Homeopathic Company and its division, Hyland’s, Inc., have many symptom fighting products consumers have come to trust. For more information on their line of products, visit www.hylands.com or www.facebook.com/Hylands.Health.

About Standard Homeopathic Company

Standard Homeopathic Company develops and manufacturers lines of homeopathic medicines, including its top-selling Hyland’s brand. Hyland’s homeopathic formulas are manufactured with the highest quality natural ingredients following the strictest standards of preparation. With over a century of commitment, Standard Homeopathic Company’s tradition of excellence consistently provides quality and integrity in every product. From Hyland’s Teething Tablets to Hyland’s Calms Forté, Standard Homeopathic Company cares for your family at every stage of life. Consumers can trust Standard Homeopathic Company’s products to be natural, gentle, effective and safe for the entire family.

 HERE to read the original news release

Dr.Iris R. Bell, MD PhD  writes about Hyland's Teething Tablets Safety Information HERE

I wrote my own letter to  Hylands and will post their response here when/if I get one.

So, they (the FDA and Big Pharma) are forcing the recall of a natural homeopathic product... big shock.  Big Pharma doesn't want anyone using an alternative therapy and especially doesn't want us to useing a product that they are not making money off of. 

Grrrrrrrrrrr

But Heidi Stevenson of Gaia Health writes it all out for us in her excellent article 

FDA Bans Hyland's Homeopathic Teething Tablets

The FDA is stealing your right to use safe products. Remember, the FDA says you have no right to health—and they mean it.

by Heidi Stevenson

The FDA's goal of making the world safe for Big Pharma is made obvious by their attack on a product for which the possibility of harm is so far-fetched that it's laughable: Hyland's Homeopathic Teething Tablets. Well, it would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that an exceptionally safe product that's been used by thousands to ease their children's teething pains is now gone.

I was alerted to the ban on Hyland's Homeopathic Teething Tablets by JacQue Hawkins-Howard, who hoped that it wasn't true. Sadly, it is. JacQue's unsolicited testimonial for the product—"I use Hyland's products and their teething remedy. It was wonderful!"—isn't the FDA's concern. Their concern is that safe and effective products like it interfere with the sales of pharmaceuticals and the profits of doctors, because they don't see as much money from JacQue and other patients who successfully manage their own health.

Proof of the FDA's Dishonesty

In its attack on Hyland's, the FDA clearly stated:

The FDA has not evaluated Hyland’s Teething Tablets for safety or efficacy.

So, without any proof of any sort—not even an attempt to find any proof—the FDA decided that Hyland's Teething Tablets should be banned. They don't even provide any estimate as to the amount of the product that would have to be ingested to cause harm. That, of course, is because they don't care.
Not one shred of evidence is given that the product is dangerous, which isn't surprising, because it would take an incredible quantity to cause even the mildest adverse effect. Yet, the FDA panders to fear by suggesting that parents consult with a "health care professional if their child experiences symptoms such as seizures, difficulty breathing, lethargy, excessive sleepiness, muscle weakness, skin flushing, constipation, difficulty urinating, or agitation after using Hyland’s Teething Tablets.
They imply that children have been harmed because they've "received reports of children who consumed more tablets  than recommended". Notice that they don't say how many, nor do they even try to indicate whether they've found any connection between the tablets and the possible symptoms. Here's why:

It would take ingestion of at least a thousand tablets by a ten-pound child to see even the first hint of a negative response. That's at least six bottles—and even this is an extremely conservative figure.

The FDA's Targeting of Belladonna

Many pharmaceuticals utilize a Belladonna derivative, atropine, as an antispasmodic. A typical potency is 0.4 - 0.8 milligrams per pill⁽¹⁾. In this form, it can be effective, but it also carries serious risks. In contrast, the amount of Belladonna in the Hyland's formulation is a mere 0.0002 milligrams per pill. A single pill of the pharmacy formulation is 2,000 to 4,000 times stronger!

Hyland's Homeopathic Teething Tablets Ingredients

Here is the full list, quoted from Hyland's website, of the banned product:

Formula: Calcarea Phosphorica 3X HPUS - supports dentition
Chamomilla 3X HPUS - for irritability
Coffea Cruda 3X HPUS - for wakefulness and diuresis
Belladonna 3X HPUS (0.0003% Alkaloids) - for redness and inflammation
In a base of Lactose (milk sugar) NF.⁽²⁾

Available in bottles of 125 quick dissolving tablets.

Calcarea phosphorica, Chamomilla, Coffea cruda, and Belladonna are all homeopathic preparations in the 3X (US scale) homeopathic potency. That means they have been diluted so that there is less than 1 molecule of each substance per thousand molecules of the solvent—and they're even less concentrated in the final product.
All of these ingredients, when taken at a high enough dose, can be poisonous. However, at this homeopathic potency, any suggestion of poisonous qualities is beyond absurd. One is more likely to die from drinking too much water than to suffer the tiniest amount of harm from this teething remedy.

FDA's Methods

The FDA's first method is intimidation. In the case of Hyland's Teething Tablets, they simply issue a warning to the public. They claimed that the product contains a "potentially toxic" agent, implied, without evidence, that it has caused harm to children, and claimed that an inspection showed "substandard control of the manufacturing operation", though they don't say what was wrong.
Most companies cannot afford the costs involved in fighting the FDA, so most do what Hyland's has done: They acquiecse. Naturally, they're hoping that will be the end of it—but history has not shown that to be the case. As has been happening to raw milk producers and distributors, once the FDA has you in their sights, your chances of survival are slim.
That, of course, is why the FDA goes after small companies and single products. For the most part, each action manages to slip under the public's radar, and most companies simply don't believe that they could be the next target. As a result, a mass movement against the FDA hasn't started...yet.

Another Attack on Your Health Freedom

Obviously, this is yet another attack on your health freedom. The FDA is targeting individual companies, picking them off one by one. Your health is the last thing on their agenda.
If your health were their concern, the FDA would go after the makers of products like the fake butter flavoring of most popcorns, which causes brochiolitis obliterans, a disease that steals people's breath, in employees of factories that make it. They took months to take any action against the battery egg manufacturers who poisoned dozens, and those two companies are still practicing without obstruction.
Instead, the FDA goes after raw milk and a harmless homeopathic compound that soothes teething babies and eases the stress it causes their families. There can be no doubt that the FDA is serving its masters, Big Pharma. The idea that the people are their masters is just so...quaint.

HERE to read the article on Gaia Health's website

 

Kellogg's Cereal Recalled!!!

Thought that some of you might like to hear about this.... before breakfast!

Kellogg's Cereal Recall: Health Risks from Packaging?

July 12, 2010. - A substance that leached out of cereal packaging and sickened consumers, spurring Kellogg's recall of 28 million boxes of Froot Loops, Apple Jacks and other popular children's cereals, has been identified as a petroleum-based compound that appears to be a breakdown product of chemicals used in the cereal box liners.
This compound, methylnaphthalene (methyl-NAP-tha-lene), has been the subject of major, on-going government and oil industry testing and information-gathering initiatives to identify potential safety issues and fill basic data gaps, according to an Environmental Working Group (EWG) analysis of the scientific literature. Kellogg's has not publicly identified the chemical but provided the information to EWG in response to our inquiries.
Two weeks ago (June 25, 2010), Kellogg's recalled 28 million boxes of Corn Pops, Honey Smacks, Froot Loops and Apple Jacks after customers complained of what the cereal maker called an "off-taste and smell" that caused "nausea and diarrhea" in some people.
In a posting on its website that day, Kellogg’s said "...do not eat any more of this product since it doesn't meet our quality standards" but added that the reactions were not caused by "any harmful material found in the food."
The company told The Wall Street Journal that the recall was prompted by complaints from 20 concerned customers, including five who became nauseous or vomited after smelling or eating the cereal (Brat and Becker 2010).
The Kellogg’s statement said testing found "slightly elevated levels" of a food packaging "substance" in the cereal box liners and that a subsequent health risk assessment showed that "sensitive" customers could expect reactions. The web posting did not identify the substance causing the problem, but it offered consumers a number to call if they had questions or if they "would like a replacement coupon."
An EWG researcher called Kellogg’s 1-800 number to learn more. Company representatives said initially that Kellogg’s did not yet know what chemical had caused the problems, but a company nurse called back the next day with an answer: Kellogg’s chemists had determined that the "off-taste and smell" was caused by methylnaphthalene, which had leached into the cereal from the package liner.
The Kellogg’s nurse, who did not give her name, also said that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration classifies the chemical as "Generally Recognized As Safe," or GRAS. EWG, however, could not find the compound on FDA’s GRAS list online. (FDA 2010a).
Methylnaphthalene, which has two forms, is a component of crude oil and coal tar and may also be formed "as a pyrolytic byproduct from the combustion of tobacco, wood, petroleum-based fuels and coal" (EPA 2003). The petroleum-based compound is produced in enormous quantities in the United States, and health agencies know very little about its safety, EWG research shows....
...

What Kellogg’s said in its public statement:

"These packages are being recalled because we identified a substance in the package liner that can produce an uncharacteristic waxy-like off-taste and smell. The off-tastes and smells are caused by a slightly elevated level of a substance commonly present at very low levels in the waxy resins used to make packaging materials that are approved by the FDA. These resins are also commonly used to coat foods such as cheese, raw fruits and vegetables such as cucumbers. We did not find any substances that are not commonly used in packaging materials." (Kellogg’s 2010)
"We completed a thorough health-risk assessment with external experts in medicine, toxicology, public health, chemistry, and food safety. The experts agree that some consumers are particularly sensitive to these uncharacteristic off-tastes and smells and may have temporary symptoms, like nausea and diarrhea, which should subside shortly. These symptoms are a result of the off-taste and odor in the food; they are not caused by any harmful material in the food.
You should not eat the recalled product because it does not meet quality standards. If you have concerns about your health, you should consult their health care provider." (Kellogg’s 2010)

What is known about methylnaphthalene toxicity?

The little data publicly available on the toxicity of methylnaphthalene was summarized in a 2005 government review (ATSDR 2005) and in a few subsequent studies published in the peer-reviewed literature.
The chemical is known to be commonly detected in air pollutants from cigarette smoke, diesel and gasoline engine exhaust, wood smoke, tar and asphalt (ATSDR 2005).
Animal studies show that methylnaphthalene causes lung damage when exposure occurs via inhalation, ingestion and skin contact. Mice given feed containing 0.075 percent or 0.15 percent of 1- or 2-methylnaphthalene for 81 weeks had lung damage known as "pulmonary alveolar proteinosis," marked by abnormal lipids, proteins and fluid in the lung (ATSDR 2005, citing Murata 1993, 1997). Applying a mixture of 1- and 2-methylnaphthalene to the skin resulted in similar lung injury to mice (Murata 1992). In people, this lung disease is unusual and is typically caused by inhaling particulates (Lin 2009). Other types of acute lung damage have been reported, including to the epithelial and Clara cells and to the nasal epithelium (Lin 2009)
In 2005, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry concluded: "The available data on the methylnaphthalenes appear inadequate to determine their carcinogenicity potential in humans" (ATSDR 2005).
The FDA and EPA have not set safe exposure levels. ATSDR has set minimal risk levels of 0.04 and 0.07 milligram per kilogram bodyweight per day (mg/kg-d) for long-term exposure to 1- and 2-methylnaphthalene, respectively (ATSDR 2005). ATSDR also concluded that consumers are likely not exposed to methylnaphthalene via food, a statement that warrants reexamination given the chemical’s detection in Kellogg’s food packaging (ATSDR 2005).
Methylnapthalene contamination in cereal raises safety questions. The chemical is structurally similar to naphthalene, which was the primary component in mothballs until those products were reformulated due to toxicity concerns. Naphthalene and methylnapthalene share the same toxicity to lung cells. Naphthalene is also toxic to red blood cells, causing anemia, fatigue, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea (ATSDR 2005). The methylated form of the mothball chemical has not been fully assessed for toxicity to blood cells, a critical data gap when it comes to evaluating the potential effects of food contamination. The National Library of Medicine’s Hazardous Substances Data Bank lists these symptoms as a concern for workers exposed to methylnapthalene (NLM 2010).
The San Antonio Budget Grocery Examiner reported that consumers affected by the contaminated cereal typically experienced nausea and/or vomiting within 15 minutes of ingesting the cereal (King 2010). Kellogg’s attributed these effects to some individuals’ increased susceptibility to the chemical’s smell and odor (Kellogg’s 2010).
Both the company and the FDA have an obligation to follow up. It is vital that we know how the chemical made its way into the cereal boxes and what is known about the safety of this compound for children in particular, since the recalled cereals are especially popular among them.

Gaps in the food safety program

Most importantly, this episode casts further doubt upon the ability of the FDA to evaluate and assure the safety of food packaging. Methylnapthalene gives off a strong taste and odor at quite low levels. People can discern its presence at concentrations as low as 7.5 to 10 parts per billion in air and water. In the case of Kellogg’s cereals, it affected the smell and taste of the products. Thousands of other food additives, however, would not be so obvious to consumers.
Food packaging is already under scrutiny because of recent concerns over the synthetic estrogen bisphenol A (BPA) leaching from the coatings on metal food cans and jar lids into baby food, formula and other canned foods. The FDA admits that the current regulatory structure "limits [its] the oversight and flexibility" in responding to the issue of BPA in food packaging (FDA 2010c). The agency does not know how many foods contain trace levels of BPA, nor can it determine who is using petroleum waxes in packaging. It would take a lengthy rulemaking process for the Agency to request the relevant use and safety data. As a result, FDA is seeking new authority to evaluate and assure the safety of BPA in food packaging.
The discovery of contaminated cereal packaging raises serious questions about FDA’s authority to investigate and regulate all chemicals that make their way from cardboard boxes, plastic bags, metal cans and coated papers into our breakfasts and our bodies.....

HERE To read the entire article

The colour of money....and cereal

I've been preaching about this topic for a long time- 7 years to be precise. Artificial colour additives in food.

Before I get into the news article I'm writing about, let me tell you a story about my eldest daughter Quinlin.  When Quinlin was 15 months old it was christmas time- time for getting together with friends and family, time for parties and time for lots and lots of eating. Being a cute toddling happy 15 month old, Quinlin made the rounds of the party in our home, stopping for a cuddle with her "aunty", sharing a giggle with our neighbours, and sampling the wide array of snacks that were place in easy hands reach in brightly decorated bowls: veggies and dip, cheese and crackers, and chips, cheesies, and of course the quintessential candies.  I steered her clear of the candy and put the bowls and boxes out of her grabbing range, but figured "What the hell, let her have some chips and cheesies- it's a party!" ....

When I put her to bed that night- many hours past her bed time- I got very frustrated with her as she wouldn't really nurse, didn't want to cuddle and just kept thrashing around the bed.  After almost 2 hours she finally fell asleep.  I thought "Oh, she's just over tired and over excited from the party".  4 days later we attended a similar get together at a friends house and again, my little princess held court with friends and family and made the rounds of the snack bowls.  That night, same thing again, but this time she cried and cried.  She literally was vibrating, her legs shook, her arms twitched, her eyes were wide open and her face looked almost terrified!! It scared the shit out of me.
Over the course of the holiday season we had several more episodes and I started keeping track of what she'd eaten. The only common denominator I could find was cheese- which made no sense as she ate cheese all the time and never reacted this way before... ahhhhh but they were all cheese flavoured products: cheesies, nacho chips, mac & cheese... So I pulled a bunch of wrappers and boxes out and started researching the ingredients.  They all had one ingredient in common: Tartrazine.  Also known as Yellow #5. and thus my search for tartrazine began.  It's in EVERYTHING!  Go a head.  Go take a look through your pantry at the ingredients in your store bought preprepared foods.  I guarantee that at least half of them will have it listed.  Hell! it's even in White cheddar macaroni & cheese!!!
From that moment on ALL artificial food colours were banned from our house...for the most part anyways (mommy has a small cheesie addiction that has to sated occasionally). Our youngest daughter had a slight reaction to tartrazine too, but no where near as strong, but our younger son is also very sensitive to it- he becomes almost violent and thrashes and kicks and screams.

I'm sending a copy of this article to all of our friends because I have had to defend my choice to keep my children away from these colourful poisons regularly.  Just this afternoon and friend came for a visit with his daughters and brought a big bag of gummie candies for our kids.  I looked at him and said "You KNOW they can't have these".... and he made some excuse about "oh kids have to have fun, let them have them.." and even threatened (good heartedly) to tell them so that they would bug me for some candy, and I had to put my foot down and be the big meany and say "NO!"

So to all of you out there, be a Nancy and just say "NO!"  Our childrens health is worth more than a colourful (and sometimes not so colourful!) treat. 

Is Food Dye Just a Colorful Killer?

by Nichol Nelson, Posted Jun 30th 2010 @ 2:00PM

Bright-red soda, rainbow-hued kid's cereal, electric-yellow popsicles...most of us have eaten them. But unlike the public health uproar over salt and trans fats, there hasn't been much said about the dangers of food dyes. Fed up with consumer apathy, The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is calling for a complete government ban of food dyes. The advocacy group says the three most widely used dyes -- Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6 -- contain cancer-causing substances. Another dye, Red 3, has actually been identified as a carcinogen by the FDA, but you can still find it on supermarket shelves.

"These synthetic chemicals do absolutely nothing to improve the nutritional quality or safety of foods," says Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the nonprofit group. "[They] trigger behavior problems in children and, possibly, cancer in anybody."

Think you're immune to the problem because you don't gobble Fruit Loops in the morning? Think again. The dyes are in a staggering array of foods, from salad dressing to matzo balls. In fact, manufacturers put about 15 million pounds of eight synthetic dyes into the food supply each year, according to CSPI. Even scarier? Per capita consumption of dyes has risen five-fold since 1955. A lot of it has to do with the kinds of foods now marketed to children. The wilder the color, the more cash a product often brings in....

...But are the risks real? Blue 1, Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6 have long been known to cause allergic reactions in some people. CSPI says that while those reactions are not common, they can be serious. Numerous studies have shown that dyes can cause hyperactivity in children.

But cancer is the biggest worry. In 1985, the acting commissioner of the FDA said that Red 3, one of the lesser-used dyes, "has clearly been shown to induce cancer" and was "of greatest public health concern." The dye was never banned, however, and according to the CSPI, manufacturers use about 200,000 pounds of Red 3 every year in foods like fruit leather and frozen meals marketed to children.

Tests of Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40, Yellow 5(Tartrazine), and Yellow 6 showed signs of causing cancer in lab animals, according to CSPI. Yellow 5 also caused mutations, an indication of possible carcinogenicity.

In addition, according to the report, FDA tests show that the three most-widely used dyes, Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6, are tainted with low levels of cancer-causing compounds, including benzidine and 4-aminobiphenyl in Yellow 5.

HERE to read the entire article