MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Location: file:///C:/9693C613/AvianInfluenzaisNOTSPREADBYPIGEONS.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Avian Influenza is NOT SPREAD BY PIGEONS

Subject:= Avian Influenza is= NOT SPREAD BY PIGEONS


I sugg= est you all keep this information for future use and reference. Further I have prov= ided an important news release from Dr. Leonard Horowitz.

&nb= sp;

&nb= sp;

Canadian Press

Tuesday, April 20, 2004


ABBOTSFORD, B.C. (CP) - Pigeon owne= rs in the avian influenza-infested Fraser Valley will be spared t= he extermination that has befallen hundreds of thousands of chickens and turke= ys. =

Cornelius Kiley, veterinarian with the Canadian Food Inspec= tion Agency, said pigeons don't contract avian influenza, nor do they carry it. = =

"Based on risk assessment of the susceptibility of pigeons to contract avian influenza, we are essentially exempting pigeons from the depopulation orders," Kiley said in a conference call w= ith reporters.

"Pigeons do not get avian influenza and don't carry the virus," he said.=

However, pigeons can carry the viru= s in their feathers and spread it to other fowl. As a result, the movement of ho= bby pigeons must remain restricted, he said.

Since it was first detected in Febr= uary on one farm, authorities have been dealing with the spreading avian influen= za nemesis through the Fraser Valley, the province's agricultural lifeblood.

As of Tuesday, the number of commer= cial B.C. poultry operations infected with avian influenza stood at 31. <= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Garamond;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial'>=

The figure does not include 10 so-c= alled backyard poultry operations in the valley that were found to have the fast-spreading virus, which can quickly kill flocks within days. =

The agency announced earlier that in order to deal with the outbreak and eradicate it completely, some 19 million birds, mostly chickens and turkeys, would be killed in the Fraser Valley between Vancouver and Hope.

The infected poultry are being gass= ed in sealed barns using carbon dioxide and their carcasses incinerated at landfi= lls.

Poultry not infected will go to mar= ket as usual.

"We have now depopulated all b= irds from every infected premises," said Kiley. "The fact that we have found only two new= cases in the past six days suggests that we may be getting ahead of this disease."

The 31 commercial operations - or f= locks - represent about 954,000 birds, of which 81 per cent have already been eliminated and disposed of.

The method of extermination of the = birds involves pumping carbon dioxide gas into sealed barns, said Kiley.

The birds fall asleep from the gas,= then fall into a deeper sleep before dying. =

"It's considered one of the be= st methods," he said.

But the method has come under fire = from some animal welfare groups, including the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and one of their celebrity supporters, Pamela Anderson.

Anderson= wrote a letter to federal Agriculture Minister Bob Speller, complaining that the extermination methods were not the most humane available.

She asked that the authorities use nitrogen or argon gas.

But Kiley said research has shown carbon dioxide is more humane. =

Meanwhile, authorities are still wo= rking on whether other birds besides pigeons should be exempted from the cull. =

Owners of farmed ostriches and one = couple who runs a parrot sanctuary have been worried th= eir birds might be needlessly exterminated.

But Kiley said the agency wanted to move carefully when dealing with possible exemptions to the cull order.

"The early decisions will set a blueprint so we want to make sure we do it right from the get-go. =

The Agriculture Ministry has set Ma= y 21 as the date for eliminating the entire Fraser Valley poultry population of 19 million birds.

© Copyright  2004 The Canadian Press

***= ********************************************************** =

 2508-11th Avenue North

Lethbridge, Alberta T1H 1N4

March 30/04<= /o:p>


Gordon McArthur, DVM
EOC Permits Officer
Canadian Food Inspection Agency,

Abbotsford, BC


Dear Dr McArt= hur,


            Kevin Ball of Surrey, BC has suggested that I supply you wit= h some copies of references= with respect to the non-role of pigeons in Avian Influenza (AI).  For your information and considera= tion, I have enclosed herewith, = copies of papers by Panigrahy et al (1996) and by Perkins and Swayne (2002), two of the more current papers on this topic.  All of the literature = I have on hand indicates that, with respect to AI, pigeons are not a threat to the poultry industry.  They do not= seem to be infected by mild or highly pathogenic strains of the AI virus, they do not seroconvert, they do not carry the virus on their feet, and virus is not recovered from experimentally infected pigeons. I have further papers that = may be of some interest to you and your colleagues.  I would be pleased to provide copi= es if you wish.

            As a pigeon fancier myself, I am disturbed by a rumor which suggests that the arbitrary depopulation of domestic pigeons may be carried out in your quarantine area.  On this poin= t, I laud the tremendous efforts of the CFIA in applying science rather than politics to the huge BSE problem that still confronts this country.  It was truly a magnificent effort,= of which as a colleague, I continue to be immensely proud – in fact, I have expressed those sentiments to local CFIA staff.  In bringing up BSE, I = would ask respectfully that science also apply to the AI situation, and that reference to the past and current scientific literature be a major guide in= the decision-making processes. 



GA Chalmers, DVM.=  


*********************************= ********************************


Presented to the meeting of the NE Section of the US Animal Health<= /p>

Association, held in Saratoga Springs, NY, May, 1993.

        =            Avian Influenza - The Role of Pigeons


        =    Gordon A. Chalme= rs, Regional Veterinary Laboratory,

        =    Alberta Department of Agriculture, Postal Bag 3014,

        =            Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada T1J 4C7;


        =        James F. Higgins, Northside Animal Hospital,

               =     185 Mikron = Road, Bethlehem, PA 18017


        =     John J. K= azmierczak, West Trenton Animal Hospital,

        =         568 Grand Avenue, West Trenton, N.J.= 08628.



     Influenza, known= since 1878, is caused by a Type A influenza virus=

(1).  There = are three types, A, B & C.  Ty= pe A viruses have been recovered

from humans, swine and horses, and occasionally, from bir= ds and other

mammals (2).  T= ypes B and C are usually isolated only from humans (2).

Thousands of viruses belonging to many antigenic subtypes based on<= /p>

hemagglutinin= (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) surface antigens, have been

recovered from domestic and avian species over the world (1).<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>  Infections

in domestic or confined birds have been associated with several syndromes

that range from subclinical (= inapparent) to mild upper respiratory disease,

to loss of egg production, to acute fatal disease (1).

     Influenza can be= a costly disease.  The US government spent over $60

million in 1983-84 to eradicate a highly pathogenic H5N2 vir= us in poultry

flocks in Pennsylvania, = Virginia and New Jersey.  The major economic

impacts have occurred in both chickens and turkeys (1).=

     In general, free-flying wild birds do not develop significant disease=

due to influenza viruses, but infections are widespread = in many of these

birds (1).  I= t is particularly important to note that influenza viruses are=

readily recovered from migratory waterfowl, especially ducks, over the

world (1).  T= here is a great deal of speculation about the importance of

this very large reservoir of influenza viruses in wild birds.  This=

reservoir may serve as a source of viruses for other species, including

humans, lower mammals, and birds (1).  The high rate of infection allows<= o:p>

for the maintenance and emergence of new and potentially= highly dangerous

strains, by means of mutation and/or genetic reassortment. 

     Species of birds= that become infected with the virus of Avian

Influenza, shed it from the respiratory tract, from the eyes, a= nd in

droppings.  Sprea= d of the virus can occur by means of droplets of liquid

sneezed by infected birds, or in their droppings.  Vehicles, equipment,

cages, clothing, and insects in contact with these infecti= ve droplets, or

with droppings from infected birds, are ready means of spread.

     On December 23,= 1992, antibodies to Avian Influenza were found in

serum samples from a commercial flock of turkeys near Philadelphia, Pa.

(3).  Investigation= showed that there was a possible association between

this flock and live bird markets.  A virus designated H5N2 was isolat= ed

from birds in Pennsylvania.  This virus, although an H5N2 virus= , was

different from the virus that caused the 1983-84 outbreak in <= st1:place w:st=3D"on">Pennsylvania,

but similar to the virus recovered from an outbreak in <= st1:place w:st=3D"on">Britain in 1991-92.

The recent isolation from Pennsyl= vania was found to be non-pathogenic for

chickens, and to be antigenically different from the virus found in the

1983-84 outbreak in Pennsylvania.  However, it had the nucleic acid

configuration that made it potentially pathogenic (3).  State jurisdictions

concerned by this situation took both control and eradication measures when

appropriate.  Public markets, shows and exhibitions were quarantined in

Pennsylvania, and premises on which the= virus was isolated and

seroconversion had been found, were to be depopulated (3).

     Because of the v= ery great concern by state and federal officials for

the health and economics of the poultry industry in seve= ral jurisdictions,

racing pigeons have been included under the umbrella of domestic poultry,

and accordingly, racing was banned earlier this year in a number of

concerned states.  To dat= e, however. the body of scientific evidence

indicates strongly that pigeons are not involved in the transmission of=

Avian Influenz= a to domestic poultry (4-8).

     In anticipation = of future epornitics of Avian Influenza, and based on

scientific evidence indicating that racing pigeons are not a vector of

Avian Influenza (4-8), the American Racing Pigeon= Union (ARPU) and the

International Federation of Homing Pigeon Fanciers (IF) urge that pigeons

be deleted from the category of "poultry" by individual s= tate jurisdictions

concerned for the welfare of their respective poultry industri= es.

Scientific evidence in support of t= his view is presented herewith.    <= /o:p>

      During the 1983-84 epornitic of Avian Influenza in Pennsylvania, Ne= w

Jersey, Maryland and Virginia, Nettles, Wood and Webster (4) conducted a

survey of wildlife to determine the potential of wild birds= to spread

disease locally among farms, or to carry the virus to more distant

locations.  Inclu= ded in this survey were 1) wild and free-flying domestic

ducks and geese, 2) wild or free-flying domestic birds clo= sely associated

with poultry farms, poultry manure, or poultry carcasses,= 3) mice and rats

found inside and around houses containing infected poultry, and 4) wild

birds of any species reported sick or dead within the quarantine zone.

     Tracheal and cloacal swabs from birds, and lungs from mice and rat= s

were examined for virus.=   As well, in some instances, toes from birds and

rodents were also collected for the same purpose.  When feasible, blood

samples for serology were also obtained from birds and small rodents.

     In Pennsylvania, attempts to isolate viru= s were conducted on 4,132

birds and rodents collected within the quarantine zone.  Included in this

number<= /span> were 473 pigeons (92.6% of samples were obtained from known infect= ed

farms), 81 pigeon feet (100% from infected premises), and seven mourning=

doves.  None of the 4,132 s= amples was positive for H5N2 virus.  =

     Serum samples fr= om 2,147 non-aquatic birds, including 383 pigeons,

were negative for detectable antibodies to Avian Influenza.  =

     In Virginia, 313 birds, including= 50 pigeons, collected from the

quarantine zone, were negative for virus (4).

     In Maryland, the virus of Avian Influenza= was not detected in

specimens from 1,511 hunter-killed waterfowl (4).

     In the 1983-84 <= span class=3DSpellE>epornitic, there were several indications that the

lethal H5N2 influenza virus had adapted to galliform birds, ie, chickens,

turkeys, guinea fowl, pheasants and chu= kar partridge.  All of the

isolations of this lethal H5N2 virus were obtained from such gallinaceous

birds (4).

     It is important to note th= at experimental attempts to infect pigeons


with this strain of Avian Influenza did not result in replication of vi= rus

or seroconversion [4, citing Drs. M. Brugh and C.W. Beard, (Pers. Comm.),

USDA, Athens, Georgia].

     In the recent 19= 93 epornitic, in the period from February 12 to May 2,

1993, serum samples were collected from 17 flocks of meat varieties of=

pigeons, mainly White Kings located within the quarantine ar= ea, for

evidence of antibodies to Avian Influenza (5).  Flocks sizes varied from

2000 - 3000 birds, and represented a total of about 34,000 - 51,000 birds. =

Approximately 10 birds per flock were sampled, for a total of 160 birds,

and were tested by use of the agar gel precipitation test.  In every

instance, all pigeons tested were negative for antibodies to Avian

Influenza (5).=

     In 1968, citing = Wilson (pers.comm.)= , Lang et al (6) reported that

strain A/chicken/Scotland/59 caused clinical signs and dise= ase in

experiments on chickens, and that it caused only subclinical infections in

turkeys, ducks and pigeons.=  

     In Canada in 1969, Narayan et al (7) found that strain

A/turkey/Ontario/7732/66(Hav5N?) Avian Influenza virus caused acute disease

in chickens and turkeys, but did not cause disease in ducks, geese and

pigeons= .  In the experiment that included pi= geons, these investigators

housed ducks, geese and pigeons in an isolation unit.  All birds in this

unit were given the virus by intravenous inoculation and intranasal

instillation.  As we= ll, susceptible turkeys were placed in the same room as

contact controls.  All birds remained healthy for 21 days.  Virus could not<= /p>

be recovered from the blood of these infected birds 24 or 48 hours after

inoculation.  Seroconversion occurred in all inoculated birds, but = the

contact turkeys were serologically negative at 21 days.  When an infected=

turkey was introduced to the room, however, all turkeys died within 10

days.  The d= ucks, geese and pigeons remained normal.

     In 1972, Slemons and Easterday (8) inoculated the turkey-derived

strain of Avian Influenza isolated by = Narayan et. al.(7)

[A/turkey/Ontario/7732/66 (Hav5N?)], into 4 turkeys, 18 mallard ducks, 20

Japanese quail, 14 ringneck pheasants and 19 pigeons.  This experiment was

performed to determine how each of these species responded to = this virus.

The results showed that all infected turkeys died, 15% of the quail died,<= /o:p>

and only one of 19 pigeons died, with no sign of disease= in ducks and

pheasants.  Virus= was recovered from all of the turkeys, 80% of the

pheasants, 75% of the quail, 45% of the ducks, and 10% of the pigeons.

Only one pigeon developed questionably positive results in the=

hemagglutination inhibition (HI) and agar g= el diffusion tests; 16 of 18

ducks had low levels of HI antibody.

       Because it has been demons= trated by scientific investigation that

pigeons= are not involved in the spread of Avian Influenza (4-8), the<= /o:p>

American Racing Pigeon Union and the International Federation of Homing

Pigeon Fanciers, respectfully reque= st that, in anticipation of further

epornitics of Avian Influenza in poultry, 1) pigeons be removed from

regulations designating them as "poultry", and 2) pigeon racing duri= ng an

epornitic of Avian Influenza be all= owed to continue. <= o:p>

     However,in the compelling interests for the continued = health and

safety of the poultry industry, the ARPU and IF offer the following

suggestions.  First= ly, when future epornitics of Avian Influenza occur= ,

sentinel pigeons, located either within individual lofts (or within

specifically established sentinel flocks of pigeons) within a quarantine

area, could be monitored for viral and serological eviden= ce of exposure to

the virus of Avian Influenza. 

     Secondly, as an alternative, and on a more practical level, because

large transport trucks carry thousands of racing pigeons e= ach week from

approximately April to October each year, the ARPU and IF suggest that the

regular sampling of droppings from these trucks could be established as a

protocol for monitoring pigeons for evidence of Avian Influen= za during an


     It is important = to note that vehicles used for the transportation of

racing pigeons are specifically designed and operated for t= hat purpose

only.  No ot= her class of birds is shipped in these vehicles at any time. 

     The thousands of racing pigeons shipped in these vehicles to release

points each week are only a fraction of the total number bi= rds owned by all

racing fanciers involved in these shipments.  Therefore, the monitoring

procedure of sampling droppings in trucks after pigeons are released, would

effectively sample many more thousand pigeons in the several sta= te

jurisdictions involved, and would be a practical means of reassuri= ng

poultry producers, and state and federal officials alike.  The work of

Miller (5) on serology for Avian Influenza in meat varieties of pigeons=

amply demonstrates the great value of such a monitoring process.

     On the basis of scientific= data with respect to the (non) role of

racing<= /span> pigeons in the dissemination of the virus of Avian Influenza,=

therefore, the ARPU and IF respectfully request:

     1) that state and federal officials earnestly review the status of

racing<= /span> pigeons as "poultry";

     2) that racing pigeons be removed from their current designation as


     3) that because scientific investigations have established the fact

that during an epornitic of Avian Influenza, racing pigeons are not a

threat<= /span> to the economics and health of the poultry industry, the ARPU and = IF

strongly urge that during any future epornitic = of Avian Influenza, racing

pigeons= be exempt from quarantine regulations that currently affect the

movement of a number of classes of domestic birds within several=

jurisdictions<= /span>;

     4) that in the light of the facts in (3), pigeon racing be permitted

to continue within all jurisdictions affected by a future epornitic of

Avian Influenz= a.

      The ARPU a= nd IF continue to recognize the serious threat of Avian

Influenza to the poultry industry in the USA, and, on behalf of their

membership throughout the USA, express their willingness to co-operate with

state and federal jurisdictions in monitoring the status of racing pigeo= ns

with respect to Avian Influenza.  Further, the authors of this report have

been advised that the ARPU is willing to provide financial support for<= o:p>

further= scientific investigations into Avian Influenza and pigeons.  The

addresses of both organizations are appended.   =

        =              The American Racing Pigeon Union<= o:p>

        =             c/o Russ Burns, Secretary-Treasurer<= /o:p>

        =             &nb= sp;          P.O. Box 2713

        =             &nb= sp;   South Hamilton, Mass 01982

        =             &nb= sp;         = (508)-927-3621

        =             &nb= sp;  The International Federation

        =             &nb= sp; of Homing Pigeon Fanciers, Inc.

        =             &nb= sp;      c/o Mrs Marie= Rotondo

        =             &nb= sp;      107 Jefferson Stree= t

        =             &nb= sp;     Belmont Hills, Pa 19004

        =             &nb= sp;         (215)-664-0266


        =             &nb= sp;            =   *****



1) Easterday, B.C. and V.S. = Hinshaw.  1991.  Influenza.  In:  Calnek, B.W.

ed.  Diseases of Po= ultry, 9th Ed.  pps 532-551.  Iowa State University

Press, A= mes.


2) Tudor, = D.C. 1991.  Avi= an Influenza.  In:  Pigeon Health and Disease, 41-

44.  Iowa State University Press, Ames.


3) Gregory, D. 1993.  Avian Influenz= a in U.S.A.  In: Information Bulletin, <= o:p>

January 2= 5, 1993.  Food and Inspection Branch, Agricu= lture Canada, Ottawa,



4) Nettles, V.F., J.M. Wood, and R.G. Webster. 1985.  Wildlife surveillance

associated with an outbreak of lethal H5N2 avian influenza viru= s in

domestic poultry.  Avian Dis 29: 733-741.=


5) Miller, Wilson L. 1993. Pers. Comm. (Poultry Veterinarian, Lancaster

area, Pa.).


6) Lang, G., B.T. Rouse, O. Narayan, A.E. Ferg= uson and M.C.= Connell.  1968.

A new influenza virus infection in turkeys.  I. Isolation and=

characterization of virus 6213.  Can. Vet. J. 9 : 22-29.


7) Narayan, O., G. Lang, and B.T. Rouse. 1969.  A new influenza A virus

infection in turkeys.  IV.  Experimental susceptibility of domestic birds

to virus strain Turkey/Ontario/7732/1966.  Arch. = Gesamte Virusforsch. 26 :



8) Slemons, R.D. and B.C. Easterday.  1972.  Host response differences

among 5 avian species to an influenza virus -- A/Turkey/Ontario/7732/66

(HaV5N?).  Bull. World He= alth Org.  47:  521-525.



Additional References:


Hinshaw, V.S. 1987.  The nature of avian inf= luenza in migrating waterfowl,

including interspecies transmission.  Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. Avian Influe= nza,

pp 133-141, U.S. Animal H= ealth Assoc., At= hens  Ga.


Hinshaw, V.S., V.F. Nettles, = L.E. Schorr, J.M. Wood, and R.G. Webster.

1986 Influenza virus surveillance in waterfowl in Pennsylvania after the

H5N2 avian outbreak.  Avian Dis 30 : 207 - 211.<= o:p>


Most recent references:


**Perkins LE and DE Swayne.= 2002. Pathogenicity of a Hong Kong-origin<= /st1:PersonName> H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza virus for emus, geese, ducks, and pi= geons.  Avian Dis 46: 53-63.


**Panigrahy B, DA Senne, JC Pedersen, AL Shafer and JE Pearson. 1996. Susceptibility of pigeons to avian influenza. Avian Dis 40: 600-604.


**********************= ****************************************


West Nile Virus, Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) and Pigeons<= /b>


Gordon A Chalmers, DVM

Leth= bridge, A= lberta

Email:  gacdvm@telus.net=

February, 2004


= Fanciers are often concerned about West Nile Virus (WNV) and recently, Avian Influenza (Bird Flu) in pigeons.  However, alth= ough pigeons may become infected with WNV, the level of virus in their bloodstre= am isn’t high enough to infect a mosquito that might bite them.  They do become solidly immune afte= r they are exposed to the virus.  Bec= ause of these facts, pigeons DO NOT spread WNV.  Crows, magpies, blue jay= s and the ordinary English sparrow develop high levels of virus in their bloodstream  and= as a result, they can readily spread WNV through mosquitoes to other birds.  See article in the CU Yearbook for 2002.


Regarding Bird Flu, it’s still true that 1)pi= geons aren’t infected (or very rarel= y) with this virus, and 2) they don’t spread it.  Ma= ny studies have been done both over the years and recently as well, and there = is convincing evidence that pigeons are not a danger to themselves or other bi= rds when they are exposed to this virus.  I have a number of scientific studies in my files, and if anyone is interested in the science behind these claims, I can certainly provide them.  Fanciers should not worry about pi= geons and Bird Flu.


= References


=  Easterday BC and VS Hinshaw.  1991.  Influenza.  In:  Calnek, B.W.

ed.  Diseases of Po= ultry, 9th Ed.  pps 532-551.  Iowa State University

Press, Ames.


Tudor DC= .1991.  Avian Influenz= a.  In:  Pigeon Health and Disease, 41-

= 44.  Iowa State University Press, Ames.


Gregory D. 1993.  Avian Influenz= a in U.S.A.  In: Information Bulletin, <= o:p>

January 25, 1993.  Food and Inspection Branch, Agricu= lture Canada, Ottawa,



= Nettles VF, JM Wood<= /st2:Sn>, and RG Webster. 1985.  Wildlife surveillance

associated with an outbreak of lethal H5N2 avian influenza virus in

domestic poultry.  Avian Dis 29: 733-741.


Avian Influenza (‘Bird Flu’) and Pigeons


Gordon A Chalmers, DVM

Leth= bridge, Alberta, Canada

Email:  gacdvm@telus.net


        &= nbsp;   The current worldwide concern about the spre= ad of Avian Influenza among humans and poultry in southeast Asia also has many pigeon fanciers interested in the role of pigeons, especially racing pigeons, in this serious disease.  On the basis of these concerns, it= seems appropriate and timely to take a look at this disease, for the benefit of fanciers.

            Influenza has been known since 1878, and is caused by a Type A influenza virus.  There are th= ree types of influenza viruses, namely A, B & C.  Type A viruses have been recovered= from humans, swine and horses, and occasionally, from birds and other mammals.  Types B and C are usually isolated= only from humans.  The virus curren= tly infecting in birds in southeast Asia is = a Type A influenza virus.

Thousands of influenza viruses belonging to many subtypes have been recovered from domestic and avian species over the world.=   Infections in domestic or confined birds have been associated with several forms of the disease, ranging from inapparent<= /span> to mild upper respiratory disease, to loss of egg production, through to ac= ute fatal disease.  At present, Av= ian Influenza is recognized in two forms: 1) Highly pathogenic avian influenza, also called Fowl Plague, and 2) Low pathogenic avian influenza.  (‘Pathogenic’ refers t= o the ability of an infecting agent to produce disease – hence, a virus tha= t is highly pathogenic is capable of producing severe disease and often, acute death.)  The highly pathogenic= form spreads rapidly among flocks of poultry and is often highly fatal.  It has been noted that one gram (a= bout 1/30th of an ounce) of contaminated droppings from infected chickens can contain enough highly pathogenic virus to infect 1,000,000 birds.  Conversely, the low pathogenicity form generally causes only mild disease.

In general, free‑flying wild birds do not develop significant disease following infection with influenza viruses, but infections are widespread in many of these birds.  It is particularly important to note that influenza viruses are readily recovered= from migratory waterfowl, especially ducks, over the world.  There is a great deal of speculati= on about the importance of this very large reservoir of influenza viruses in w= ild birds.  This reservoir may ser= ve as a source of viruses for other species, including

humans, lower mammals, and birds.  The high rate of infection allows = for the maintenance and emergence of new and potentially highly dangerous strai= ns, by means of mutation and/or genetic reassortment. 

Species of birds that become infected with the virus of Avian I= nfluenza, shed it from the respiratory tract, from the eyes, and in droppings.  Spread of the virus can occur by m= eans of droplets of liquid sneezed by infected birds, or in their droppings.  Vehicles, equipment, cages, clothi= ng, and insects in contact with these infective droplets, or with droppings from infected birds, are ready means of spread.

Now, what is the role of pigeons in Avian Influenza?  To answer that question more fully= , we can look at some past examples of outbreaks of the disease in poultry in No= rth America, plus the current one in Asia, a= nd the tests that were conducted on pigeons collected from areas in which the dise= ase occurred.

            In late 1992, antibodies to Avian Influenza were found in blood samples from a commercial flock of turkeys in the northeastern USA.  (Note that antibodies are protecti= ve substances that are produced by the defensive network of the body in respon= se to an infection).  Investigati= on showed that there was a possible association between this flock and live bi= rd markets.  An influenza virus d= esignated H5N2 was isolated from birds in one location.   State jurisdictions were con= cerned by this situation and took both control and eradication measures when appropriate.  Public poultry markets, shows and exhibitions were quarantined and premises on which the v= irus were isolated and depopulated.

Because of the very great concern by state and federal officials for the health and economics of the poultry industry in several jurisdictions in the USA, racing pigeons were included under the umbrella of domestic poultry, and accordingly, racing was banned in a number of concerned states.  To date, however, the body of scie= ntific evidence indicates strongly that pigeons are not involved in the transmissi= on of Avian Influenza to domestic poultry.

During an outbreak of Avian Influenza (H5N2) nine years earlier (1983-84), again in the northeastern USA= , scientists conducted a survey of wildlife to determine the potential of wild birds to spread disease locally among farms, or to carry the virus to more distant locations.  Included i= n this survey were 1) wild and free‑flying domestic ducks and geese, 2) wild= or free‑flying domestic birds closely associated with poultry farms, pou= ltry manure, or poultry carcasses, 3) mice and rats found inside and around hous= es containing infected poultry, and 4) wild birds of any species reported sick= or dead within the quarantine zone.

 &nb= sp;          Tracheal (windpipe) and vent swabs from birds, and lungs = from mice and rats were examined for virus.&nbs= p; As well, in some instances, toes from birds and rodents were also collected for the same purpose.  When feasible, blood samples were also obtained from birds and small rodents.  Attempts to isolate = virus were conducted on 4,132 birds and rodents collected within the quarantine zone.  Included in this number= were 473 pigeons (92.6% of these pigeons were obtained from known infected farms= ), 81 pigeon feet (all of them from influenza-affected premises), and seven mourning doves.  None of the 4= ,132 samples was positive for influenza virus.&= nbsp; Blood samples from 2,147 non‑aquatic birds, including 383 pige= ons, were negative for antibodies to Avian Influenza – an indication that infection by this virus had not occurred in these birds.  An additional 313 birds, including= 50 pigeons, collected from the quarantine zone, were also negative for influenza virus.  It is important to not= e that experimental attempts to infect pigeons with this strain of Avian Influenza= did not result in either multiplication of the virus in these pigeons, or evide= nce of antibodies in the blood.  T= he results of all of these studies indicated that pigeons were not infected wi= th Avian Influenza and did not spread it.

            In the 1993 outbreak in the USA, in the period from February to May, blood samples were collected from 17 fl= ocks of meat varieties of pigeons, mainly White Kings located within the quarant= ine area, for evidence of antibodies to Avian Influenza.  Flock sizes varied from 2000 ̴= 9; 3000 birds, and represented a total of about 34,000 ‑ 51,000 birds. Approximately 10 birds per flock were sampled, for a total of 160 birds.  In every instance, all pigeons tes= ted were negative for antibodies to Avian Influenza.

            Another study published in 1996 on the susceptibility of pigeons to Avian Influenza, found that groups of pigeons inoculated with two strains of highly pathogen= ic influenza virus or two strains of nonpathogenic virus remained healthy duri= ng the 21-day trial period, did not shed virus, and did not develop antibodies= to this disease &n= bsp; further evidence that pigeons are not a factor in the spread = of this disease,

More recent evidence from experimental work in 2001/02 has shown that pigeons infected experimentally with the highly pathogenic form of the virus (designated H5N1, and of Hong Kong origi= n) did not develop signs of this disease and did not have detectable changes to th= is disease in their tissues.  As = well, virus was not found in their tissues and neither was it re-isolated from sw= abs of tissues.  These findings indicated once again that pigeons (along with starlings, rats and rabbits u= sed in these studies), are largely resistant to infection with this virus.=

            Despite these reassuring findings, fanciers should be aware of the very  slight possibility that if a returning race bird, or any wild bird for that matter, drops into a poultry farm on which the chickens are infected with Avian Influenza, it could pick= up the influenza virus on its feet as it walks through droppings from these infected chickens.  If this bi= rd were to fly to another poultry farm, in theory it could be a mechanical mea= ns of spreading the virus on its feet to chickens on the second farm.  The importance of this fact is tha= t Type A influenza viruses can remain viable for long p= eriods at moderate environmental temperatures, for four days in water at 22o<= /sup>C (72oF), and for over 30 days at 0oC (32oF)= .  However, as noted in earlier studi= es, the feet of pigeons collected from affected poultry farms were examined for influenza virus and all were found to be negative. 

            Given this information from the scientific literature, it is important to note the non-role of pigeons in the spread of Avian Influenza, and the fact that pig= eons themselves are not infected by this virus.

The reasons for the understandable caution and concern by regulatory agencies  when they are faced with outbreaks of Avian Influenza include the fact that it c= an be a very costly disease.  For example, the US government spent over $60 million in 1983‑84 to eradicate a highly pathogenic H5N2 virus in poultry flocks (both chickens and turkeys).

I hope that this = brief look at Avian Influenza and the non-role of pigeons in the spread of this disease to poultry will be of some assurance to concerned fanciers.  Further information on this diseas= e can be obtained from federal or provincial/state governmental agencies.  For anyone who is interested,= I can supply a list of scientific references from which this article was draw= n.



**********= ***************************************************************<= /span>




Dr. Len Horowitz Debunks Avian Flu Hysteria Campaign


Leonard = G. Horowitz | October 11, 2005




Political Reality Versus Mass-Mediated Myths Avian Flu for Profit Lethal?

Transmissi= bile?

Treatabili= ty?

Why Asia?=

The "Big One"



If avian flu becomes more than a threatened pande= mic, it will have done so by political and economic design.

This thesis is supported by current massive media misrepresentations, profiteering on risky and valueless vaccines, gross neg= lect of data evidencing earlier similar man-made plagues including SARS, West Ni= le Virus, AIDS and more; continuance of genetic studies breeding more mutant f= lu viruses likely to outbreak, inside trading scandals involving pandemic savvy White House and drug industry officials, curious immunity of these pharmaceutical entities over the past century to law enforcement and mainst= ream media scrutiny, and published official depopulation objectives. With the revelations and assertions advanced herein, the public is forewarned against this physician assisted mass murder best termed

"ia= trogenocide."* This genocidal imposition is expected to serve mainly economic and political depopulation objectives.



In April, 2003, a social experiment called SARS, = said to have arrived from Asia, heavily struck Toronto. I was there throughout most of this Asian flu-foreshadowing fright. This bizarre new pneumonia-like illness was named Severe Acute Respiratory Syndr= ome. It was said to be the latest threat in an ongoing series of attacks on huma= nity by mysteriously mutating "supergerms."= ;


A careful study of the scientific and<= /span>

medical-sociological correlates and antecedents of= this "outbreak" revealed something amiss far more insidious than SARS.= I critically considered Toronto<= /st1:City>'s media reaction as any Harvard-trained public health expert in media persuas= ion behavioral science might.

The scourge had all the earmarks of a novel social experiment conducted by white-collar bioterrorist.


It seemed clear to me that this unprecedented population manipulation effectively indoctrinated the mass mind in support = of a grossly ineffective, albeit legislated, public health response in advance of the arrival of "the Big One." Throughout the "SARS

Scam,"(1) repeated refer= ences were made to biological agents that might facilitate decimation of approximately a third to half of the world's population. Having extensively reviewed political population control literature and contemporary objective= s of leading global industrialists, I noted these predictions were in close keep= ing with current official population reduction objectives.(2)=


Canada's response to SARS in 2003 wa= s, for the first time in history, directed by the United Nations and World Health Organization (WHO). Having reviewed the intimate financial and administrati= ve ties between these organizations, the Rockefeller family, Carnegie Foundation, and the world's leading drug makers, "the fox," in essence, reigned over Canada's "chickens."= ;


The truth about plagues includes the fact that "no grand pandemic ever evolved divorced from major socio-political upheaval." SARS advanced a political agenda more than a public health emergency. If public health officials earnestly intended to prevent these n= ew emerging diseases, or successfully treat them at their roots, I repeated, t= hey would study their obvious origins from the merged military-medical-biotechnology arena. A basic course in medical sociology simply justifies this utilitarian counsel.

"Experts" had been predicting the arriv= al of a super-plague for decades.


What was HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS about the mysterious a= nd terrifying arrival of SARS, however, was its timing.

It synchronously arrived with the global war on terrorism, and the Anglo-American war with Iraq. It seemed a convenient distraction from the fact that the earlier Bush administration had shipped = Saddam Hussein most of his deadly biological weapons arsenal including anthrax and West Ni= le Virus. SARS was pathognomonic (i.e., symptomati= c and characteristic) of what I had predicted and explained in the book, Death in= the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare (Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 2001; http://www.healthyworldd= istributing.com/), a prophetically-titled text that predated the 9-11 attacks on America by several months, and provided a contextual analysis of certain globalists' links to recent "outbreaks."


In essence, I provided insight into the broad application of a new form of institutionalized "bioterrorism" consistent with state sponsored biological warfare. Saddam Hussein was said to have exposed populations in his and adjacent lands with biologi= cal and chemical weapons of mass destruction.


SARS and the current avian flu fright is sanction= ed by military-medical-pharmaceutical-petrochemical

industrialists likewise operating above the = law in many documented instances. Having testified before the U.S. Congress, I personally experienced how premiere pharmaceutical industrialists direct our political-economic representatives in government.

Emerging diseases complement the political "= War on Terrorism," and our bioterror-influenced culture. This agenda serves two primary objectives: profitability and population-reduction.


Political Reality Versus Mass-Mediated Myths The = ever increasing madness around us is eerily consistent with globalist think tank recommendations for the current "conflicts short of war.&qu= ot; Beginning in the late 1960s, "economic substitutes for standard militarization" were sought and found by leading global industrialists. New biological threats, the "war on terrorism," and increasing numbers of "natural disasters" including space-based threats and = superstorms were considered economically and politica= lly expedient compared with the first and second world wars. These "confli= cts short of war" were decidedly more manageable and economically viable. = For this reason, especially their profitability, they were leading options among Anglo-American policy makers.


Nelson= Rockefell= er's protégé, Henry Kissinger, for instance, as National Security Advisor = (NSA) under Richard Nixon, oversaw foreign policy while considering Third World population reduction "necessities" = for the U.S., Britain, Germany, and other allies. Th= is Bush nominee to direct the 9-11 conspiracy investigation, a reputed war cri= minal, then selected the option to have the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) develop biological weapons, according to= the U.S. Congressional Record of 1975. Among these new man-made biological weap= ons were germs far deadlier than the avian flu.


For example, by 1968, when Kissinger requested and received updated intelligence on useful "synthetic biological agents&q= uot; for germ warfare and population control, mutant recombinant flu viruses had just been engineered by Special Virus Cancer Program researchers O'Conner, Stewart, Kinard, Rauscher and others.(3) During= this program, influenza and parainfluenza viruses we= re recombined with quick acting leukemia viruses (acute l= ymphocytic leukemia) to deliver weapons that potentially spread cancer, like the flu, = by sneezing. These researchers also amassed avian cancer (sarcoma) viruses and inoculated them into humans and monkeys to determine their carcinogenicity.=

In related efforts, Raucher<= /span> et al. used radiation to enhance avian virus's cancer-causing potential. Th= ese incredible scientific realities have been officially censored and generally neglected by the media's mainstream.


Similarly, the Institu= te of Science in Society (IoSS) in London raised the genetic engineering question in the origin of SARS. "Could genetic engineering have contributed inadvertently to creating the SARS virus?"

they asked. "This point was n= ot even considered by the expert coronavirologists called in to help handle the crisis, now being feted and woed by pharmaceutical companies eager to develop vaccines." Those living in glass houses should not throw stones. The above emphasis is added to show <= span class=3DSpellE>IoSS they had "not even considered" intenti= onal SARS deployment in their scientific, allegedly unbiased, purview.(4)


Conflicts short of war, like the "War on AIDS," "War on Drugs," "War on Terrorism," "W= ar on Cancer," and now "War on the Avian Flu" require sophistic= ated propaganda programs employing fear campaigns for social acceptance and popu= lar support of legislated policies. These psychological operations (officially termed PSYOPS) for "command and control warfare"

(technically called C2= W), experts advise, best support the emerging "Revolution in Military Affairs" (RMA).

The RMA's capabilities include "a form of human slavery" in which the world's captive populations would not know they are enslaved.(2)=


The RMA undoubtedly incorporates the use of debilitating biologicals and chemical agents mo= st generously on behalf of drug and vaccine makers. A classic example is the t= oxic carcinogenic organophosphate pesticides deployed against human populations, said to target "mosquitoes," in the "War Against the West Nile Virus." Such "non-lethal warfare" agents, as t= hese are militarily termed, are indeed deadly, but mortality results slowly from toxic exposures allowing more profits to be made by allied pharmaceutical a= nd medical industrialists. Victims of the "non-lethal" exposures die slowly from chronic debilitating diseases. Expensive hospitals and long-term care facilities are virtual concentration camps. The ailments generated for "iatrogenocide"

include the plethora of autoimmune di= seases and newer cancers virtually non-existent 50 years ago. This fact, alone, strongly suggests a genocidal socio-economic and political agenda.


Avian Flu for Profit

In response to SARS, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute in Washington, Michael Fumento, published an economic thesis in Toronto related to the one I advance here. The "Super-bug or Super Scare,"= ; he wrote was published in Canada's National Post. Canadians were warned to "quarantine themselves," = wear masks, and in some cases stay home. The Ontario Health Minister declared a "health emergency," as the media dubbed the "mysterious kill= er" a "super-pneumonia."

Recoiling from the hype, Fum= ento asked and answered a few "real questions . . . How lethal, how transmissible, and how treatable is this strain?" T= he answers, he concluded, "leave no grounds for excitement, much less panic." The same may be said for this new curse of avian flu.(1)



At this writing, the avian flu is said to have ki= lled "about 65 people" in Southeast Asia during the past two years! Little to no data is available on these individu= als who most commonly had immune-compromising medical conditions. Further, all deaths were in Asian countries with questionable health services.


Conversely, other forms of flu kill more than 40,= 000 North Americans annually, generally the immune-compromised elderly.


Transmissi= bile?

According to USA Today (October 9, 2005), "European health officials are working to contain the [avian flu] viru= s, which so far has not infected anyone in the region." Although, alleged= ly "more than 140 million birds have died or been des= troyed, . . . and financial losses to the poultry sector have topped $10 billion." This propaganda actually admits, "t= he current virus, known as H5N1, has not yet mutated to the point at which it = can easily spread from person to person." In fact, it is likely to have ne= ver spread from person to person other than during laboratory=



Treatabili= ty?

"The U.S. Senate has already approved a $3.9 billion package to buy vaccines and antiviral medications, and the Administration is also preparing a request for an additional $6 billion to = $10 billion," according to a current BusinessWeek report.( 6)


"Beam me up Scottie, there is no intelligent life on this planet." This largely explains why the public puts up with this deadly deception. Even USA Today bemons, "there is no human vaccine yet." So= how come the U.S.


Senate is rushing to spend all these billions for= an avian flu vaccine?


I suppose we should overlook the fact that the current frightening strain of H5N1 avian flu virus has never readily jumped from human to human, and not commonly from birds to humans either. Thus, an effective vaccine can only be prepared by mutating this virus, thus creating what the world fears most. Let me explain. . . .


To make the human vaccine specific for the H5N1 mutant virus, you must start with the human virus which does not yet exist, except in perhaps military-biomedical-pharmaceutical laboratories. In fact, this is precisely what is being prepared based on news reports. To produce = the human pathogen, the avian virus must be cultured for lengthy periods of tim= e in human cell cultures, then injected into monkey a= nd ultimately humans to see if these experimental subjects get the same feared flu. Thus,= the flu virus the world currently fears most is either: 1) now being prepared in labs paid by industrialists with massive wealth-building incentives to "accidentally" release the virus; or 2) has already been prepared= in such labs to take advantage of this current fright and future sales followi= ng the virus's release.


Remember, to be effective against a virus, a vacc= ine is said to require specificity. If authorities were to now have the main H5= N1 avian flu strain feared to spread at some future date there's no assurance = by the time they developed the vaccine the strain would remain sufficiently the same for the vaccine to be effective anyway due to expected viral mutations= .

Viral mutations over time is a function of the agent's new= ness. New man-made viruses, laboratory creations, like the ones currently being prepared for vaccine trials, are less stable not having evolved over the millennia. Thus, the entire vaccine effort is largely, if not entirely, a s= ham with ulterior motives.


Remember too, that a vaccine's reliability requir= es years, or at least months, of testing in the targeted population. Vaccine injury data must, or should, be meticulously collected over this period to assure the vaccine is not killing and maiming more persons than it is helpi= ng or saving. Can you seriously believe this assurance will be provided by government or pharmaceutical industry officials in this pandemic's wake? FEMA's failed Katrina response pails by comparison to this public health liability and vaccine-in= jury certainty.


I say "vaccine-injury certainty" becaus= e of the extensive list of newly developed vaccinations, highly touted when brou= ght to market, that caused horrific results. This list includes the first swine= flu vaccine, polio vaccines, smallpox vaccine, anthrax vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, and most recently Lyme disease vaccine that crippled approximately 750,000 people within months of its release and prior to its recall by the = FDA.


Most people fail to realize all vaccines carry a = list of ingredients that typically increase human disease and death (i.e., morbi= dity and mortality). These include toxic elements and chemicals such as mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde and formalin (used to preserve corpses), MSG, foreign genetic material, and risky proteins from various species of bacteria, viru= ses, and animals that have been scientifically associated with triggering autoim= mune disorders and certain cancers. A growing body of scientific evidence strong= ly suggests vaccines are largely responsible for increasing cases of autism and other learning disabilities, chronic fatigue, fibromya= lgia, Lupus, MS, ALS, rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, hay fever, allergies, chronic draining ear infections, t= ype 1 autoimmune diabetes, and many, many more pandemics.

These chronic ailments are said to require long-t= erm medical care for the patients' management causing toxic side effects result= ing in America's leading killer--iatrogenic disease. That is, vaccines and other pharmaceuti= cal industry inventions are literally killing or disabling millions with little effort on the part of government officials and their drug industry cohorts = to arrest this scourge.


For all we know, governments are ordering an avia= n flu vaccine that will precisely deliver this pandemic to the world to affect population control. Absurd thesis?

Read on.


BusinessWeek expects avian flu vaccine stockpiling by government officials will help the Sano= fi-Pasteur company on behalf of Sanofi-Aventis and Chiron.=

"Tamiflu," = it reported is an antiviral manufactured by Roche, . . . considered effective against avian flu. .

. . The U.S. owns enough for 4.3 mill= ion people, with more on order." BusinessWeek = failed to report: 1) Tamiflu's safety and effectivenes= s has not been determined in people with other chronic medical conditions--a significant percentage of the U.S.

population-- and common side effects of this drug include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, bronchitis, stomach pain, dizziness, headaches, and much, much more; 2) Roche (Hoffman-LaRo= che) was found guilty of price fixing the world's supply of vitamins in 1999 as = part of the global petrochemical/pharmaceutical cartel evolved from Nazi-Germany= 's I.G. Farben

organization;(2)(6) and 3) S= anofi-Aventis's corporate colleagues include Merck, a company that received a lion's share = of the Nazi war chest at the end of WWII, whose earnings plunged after the withdrawal last year of its deadly Vioxx arthri= tis drug. According to recent news reports, Merck is partnering with Sanofi-Aventis to produce the world's first sexually-transmitted-cancer vaccine to be given to prepubescent boys and girls.(7) Merck is infamous for having developed the first hepatitis B vacc= ines that triggered the international AIDS pandemic according to published scientific research and stunning documents reprinted in this author's natio= nal bestselling



In the weeks and months following the 9-11 attack= s on America, I traced the widely publicized anthrax mailings "mystery" to U.S. Central Intelligence Agency

(CIA) commissioned biological weapons contractors with ties to Britain's MI6, Porton Down, and this same Anglo-American pharmaceuti= cal cartel.(9) The anthrax mailings fanned fears of bioterrorism throughout Ame= rica and economically served primarily vaccine and drug makers with administrati= ve and financial links to these avian flu profiteers.(10)


People willingly relinquish their civil rights and personal freedoms in the wake of such engineered frights. The passage of the infamous "Homeland Security Act" in America, and its counterpart in Canada, are classic examples of this societal direction, forced legislation, and egregious manipulation.


Why Asia?=

How convenient that Asia is said to be the origin, as with SARS, of this latest plague when Chinese-Anglo-American relations are strained to say the least.<= /span>


In the days preceding the emergence of the first = SARS cases, America raced t= o the Pacific Rim to impact escalating aggressions on the Korean peninsula.

Communist China--a "most favored" trading partner with America--is politically allied with several American enemies, including those said to possess weapons of mass destruction, including Iraq. Coi= ncidental? Not likely when viewing the larger political picture involving the Ango-American oligarchy's RMA, its global enterprises= , and instigated planet-wide "conflicts short of war."


Consider also the fact the media's mainstream has been heavily influenced, if not entirely controlled, by multi-national corporate sponsors protecting and advancing the interests of a relatively s= mall number of global entities. Also recall that the focus of news providers, on= any given day or hour, results from intelligence agency directives, according to reputable authorities including myriad retired news officials and intellige= nce officers. So ask and answer the following intelligent questions:=


* Why have American military officials, beginning with Secretary of Defense William Cohen during the Clinton years, publicized America's greatest vulnerabil= ity lies in the realm of biological weapons wielded by terrorists? Is this not a for= m of treason against the = United States to relay such sensitive intellige= nce to potential enemies through the mainstream press?


* Why does the mainstream med= ia continue to foretell of the expected arrival of the "Big One"-an influenza virus that will produce a super-flu that will kill billions of people, like the "Spanish flu" did between 1918-19, while totally disregarding the individuals, organizations, and laboratories that have lab= ored to produce these weapons of mass destruction? Even the devastating Spanish = Flu virus has been, literally, unearthed for further study and, do you suppose, deployment?


* Why was the "Spanish flu" influenza v= irus called the "Spanish flu" when it originated, by historic accounts= , in Tibet in 1917? It is said that Spanish newspapers were the only ones reporting on= the great plague due to their neutrality over World War I politics. However, Spain was as dear to America then as Communist China is to the United States today. The "Spanish flu" was named such following two decades of disputes between America and Spain over colonization of the Caribbean Islands, Hawaii and the Philippines beginning with the Spanish American war that ended in the Philippines in 1902. In fact,= the grand Spanish flu began in military camps. Does this history appear to be repeating?


*Doesn't it make sense that America is being manipulated,= if not targeted, for the purpose of advancing globalistic= agendas, central among them is population reduct= ion?


The "Big One"

As mentioned above, during the 1960s and early 19= 70s, military biological weapons contractors with intimate ties to leading drug industrialists prepared mutants of influenza and para<= /span>-influenza viruses recombined with acute lymphocytic leuke= mia viruses. In other words, they stockpiled a quick spreading cancer virus whi= ch may also be deployed.(3) Alternatively, many infectious disease experts and government health officials oblivious to this scientific reality say this a= vian flu might be the 'Big One." Several days ago, the United Nations relea= sed a report that stated as many as 150 million people worldwide might die from this avian flu.


Emma= Ross of the Associated Press repor= ted on SARS as the World Health Organization (WHO) launched it= s "crisis plan to attack" the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. WH= O, as you may recall, is a U.N. sponsored organization that is rumored to have helped spread AIDS to Africa by way of contaminated hepatitis B and/or polio vaccinations. There is a reasonable amount of evidence to support this contention.(1= )


More disconcerting, the U.N. is known to be heavi= ly influenced by Rockefeller family members and t= heir petrochemical-pharmaceutical interests. History shows R= ockefeller fortunes built the U.N. building in New York City. During WWII, the Ro= ckefeller family and their Standard Oil Company supported Hitler<= /st2:Sn> more than they did the allies according to court records. One federal judge ruled Rockefeller committed "treason"= ;

against the United States. Following WWII, according to attorney John Loftus-an official Nazi war = crimes investigator-Nelson Rockefeller persuaded the = U.N.'s South American voting block to favor Israel's creation only to ass= ure secrecy regarding his support for the Nazis. Earlier that century, John D. Rockefeller joined Prescott = Bush and the British Royal Family in sponsoring the eugenics initiatives that ga= ve rise to Hitler's racial hygiene programs. Duri= ng the same period the Rockefeller family virtually monopolized American medicine, American pharmaceutics, and the cancer and genetics industries.(2, 3)


Today, the Rockefeller family, its foundation, U.N.

and WHO remain at the forefront of administering "population programs" designed to reduce world populations to more manageable levels. As per an advertisement in Foreign Affairs--a prestigious political periodical published by the David Rockefeller directed Council on Foreign Relations--the U.S. population is being targ= eted for a 50%



"We've never faced anything on this scale wi= th such a global reach," said Dr. David Heymann, of the WHO, not regarding the avian flu, but SARS.


"This is the first time that a global networ= k of [Rockefeller-directed infectious disease 'surveillance' outposts and] laboratories are sharing information, samples, blood, pictures," added= Dr.

Klaus Stohr, a WHO virologist coordinatin= g labs internationally. "Basically overnight, there are no secrets, there is = no jealousy, there is no competition in the face of= a global health emergency. This is a phenomenal network."(1) ____________________


* The term "iatrogenoci= de" is derived from the combination of words "iatroge= nesis," meaning physician induced illness, and "genocide," defined as the mass killing and/or enslaving of people for economics, politics, and/or ideology.


Leonard = G. Horowitz,

About the Author Leonard G. Horowitz, D.M.D., M.A= ., M.P.H., is an internationally known authority in the overlapping fields of public health, behavioral science, emerging diseases, and bioterrorism. He received his doctorate in medical dentistry from Tufts University School of Dental Medicine in 1977, was awarded a post-doctoral fellowship in behavior= al science at University of Rochester, earned a Master of Public Health deg= ree from Harvard University, and another Master of Arts degree in health education from Beacon College, all before joining the research faculty at Harvard. Dr. Horo= witz is best known for his national bestselling book, Emerging Viruses: AIDS &am= p; Ebola - Nature, Accident or Intentional? (Tetrahedron P= ress, 1998; 1-888= -508-4787) which recently resulted in the United States General Accounting Office investigating the man-made origin of AIDS theory.<= /p>

(See: http://www.healingcele= brations.com/gao.htm) Dr.

Horowitz's work in the field of vaccin= ation risk awareness has prompted at least three Third Wor= ld nations to change their vaccination policies. His stunning testimony before= the United States Congress'

Government Reform Committee,<= /span> literally brought the hearing to a halt. (See: healingcelebrations.com) Dr.=

Horowitz questioned government health officials regarding a Centers for Disease Contro= l and Prevention

(CDC) secreted report showing a definitive link between the mercury ingredient (i.e., Thimerosal), common to most vaccinations, and the skyrocketing rates of autism and behavioral disorders affecting our children and the future of our nation.

Incredibly, Dr. Horowitz alerted the FBI, in writing and in person, one week before the first anthrax mailing was announced in the press, that a "major anthrax fright"= was in the process of unfolding that demanded the FBI's urgent attention. Needl= ess to say they did not heed Dr. Horowitz's prophetic warning= .

Moreover, three months before the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Dr. Horowitz released his thirteenth boo= k, prophetically titled Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare. The book focuses on the West Nile Virus as an = act of Bioterrorism, and considers what and who is really behind this and other recent outbreaks. Dr.

Horowtiz argues that his disclosures e= xpose the roots of global terrorism, along with the individuals and organizations= at the heart of what he calls "the petrochemical-pharmaceutical cartel&qu= ot;. He believes this "multi-national corporate beast" is in the proce= ss of committing global genocide, profiting from engineered frights, and at the same time, most efficiently culling targeted populations considered excessi= ve.

As you may have heard, Senator Patrick Lea= hy (D-VT), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called for an investiga= tion into the links between recent West Nile Virus outbreaks and bioterrorism. <= st1:PersonName w:st=3D"on">Dr. Horo= witz is among the leading pioneers of this theory.

Dr.<= /st2:title> Horowitz= 's most recent book is DNA: Pirates of the Sacred Spiral, a referenc= e text on the electro-genetics of biology, disease therapy, and human spirituality. This work also details links between the anthrax mailings and human genome = project heist, and leading intelligence agency, genetics industry, and pharmaceutic= al company officials.

For more information about Dr. Horowitz's books, videos, CDs and DVDs link to www.healthyworlddistributing.c= om and www.tetrahedron.org, or by calling 1-888-508-4787. His official website is www.drlenhorowitz.com.

This article was provided courtesy of Dr. Leonard G.

Horowitz<= /span> and Tetra= hedron Publishing Group. It's copyright is relinquished for widespread distribution.


1) Horowitz LG. SARS<= /st2:Sn> (Severe Acute Respiratory

Syndrome): A Great Global Scam. Available= at:

http://www.healingcelebrations.com/SARS.htm<= /span>

2) Horowitz LG. Deat= h in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare= .

Sandpoint, ID: Tetrahedron Publishing Group= , (Spring) 2001.

3) Horowitz LG. Emer= ging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola, Nature, Accident or Intentional? Sandpoint, ID:

Tetrahedron Publishing Group, (Spring) 2001.

4) The Institute of Science in Socie= ty. SARS and Genetic Engineering? <= st1:City w:st=3D"on">London, England. Article available at:

http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/health_risks/sars_engineering.htm= l


5) Knox N. Europe braces for avian flu. USA<= /st1:country-region> TODAY, October 9, 2005; Manning A.Government to st= ock up on avian flu shots. USA Today, Oct 8, 2005.

6) Wang P. Avian Flu: Inoculate Your Portfolio.

BusinessWe= ek. Online ed= ition. Available at:

http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/oct2005/pi2005110= _4988_pi015.htm

7) CNNMoney. Merck sh= ares jump on cancer drug vaccine.

October 6, 2005.

Available at:

http:= //money.cnn.com/2005/10/06/news/fortune500/merck.reut/


8) For more scientific background on the link bet= ween the hepatitis B vaccine and the AIDS pandemic link to http://www.originofAIDS.com.

9) Horowitz LG. The = CIA's Role in the Anthrax

Mailings: Could Our Spies be Agents for

Military-Industrial Sabotage, Terrorism, and Even Population Control? A Special Report. Art= icle available at:



10) Horowitz LG. DNA: Pirates of the Sacred Spiral.=

Sandpoint, ID: Tetrahedron Publishing Group, 2004.