Hot News!
• Cincinnati Progressives on the Bailout
• EXPOSED! Two sets of rules on Fountain Square
Contact Us
v mail, fax: (214) 481-6464
e mail: click here
Events
 |
|
|
Friday, November 03, 2006
NCAHF Files Complaint, WTF Blog Uploads Docs—Bad Day for Vic Wulsin
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
This morning, Dr. Robert Baratz, on behalf of the National Council Against Health Fraud, requested that the State Medical Board of Ohio conduct an investigation into the activities of Dr. Victoria Wells (Wulsin)—who is also in the final week of a campaign against Republican incumbent Jean Schmidt in the race for second congressional district seat. Additionally, two local bloggers have uncovered new documents regarding another scandal which plagues the Wulsin campaign at this critical hour.
Baratz’s letter to the medical board included the following:
Participation in unsupervised, unapproved, and dangerous experiments involving human beings where serious diseases were left untreated akin to the notorious Tuskegee experiments. Wells participated with the Heimlich Institute, Henry Heimlich, The Deaconess Associations of Cincinnati, and other parties in these experiments. Further, when Wells became aware of the nature of these deviant and immoral acts she failed to reveal them to proper authorities, and thus became complicit in them. Numerous journalistic reports and release of a report on this work by Wells herself document her involvement and the experiments themselves. The experiments violate 21 CFR 50 and 56 and 45 CFR 46 and appear to involve lack of informed consent, use of unapproved biological agents, and other unprofessional conduct.
After Wells’ activities became known, she altered the records of her report in an attempt to mislead the public as to her true role.
Recently television advertising depicts Wells in a laboratory coat with a stethoscope in a medical facility suggesting to the public she is a practicing physician. In response to interviews and questions conducted by the Cincinnati Enquirer on October 20, 2006 Wells admitted she has not seen a patient in approximately five years “My most recent clinical work was at the Health Resource Center in Over-the-Rhine from 1998 to 2001.”
The so-called Heimlich Malariotherapy experiments involve the injection of malarial parasites into humans for the alleged treatment of cancer, Lyme disease, and HIV infection. They have been disclaimed by numerous medical authorities, including the Centers for Disease Control, and exposed by the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and numerous other media.
Baratz has asked for this investigation under Section 4731.22 of the Ohio Revised Code.
We can’t trust her to tell the whole truth about her involvement in malariotherapy, and so we have asked how she could be trusted as a congressperson. This question, however, has thrown party-line Democrats into a frenzy. They accuse us of working to help Jean Schmidt. Whatever. Jean Schmidt may be a bad candidate, but Wulsin’s status as ”ethically challenged” cannot be ignored.
And, in addition to Baratz’s complaint, the Whiskey Tango Foxtrot blog (apparently working in conjunction with BizzyBlog) has documents which seem to corner Wulsin in another kind of lie.
In a post entitled ” BUSTED: Vic Wulsin lying about nuclear waste,” WTF has uploaded some letters both to and from the Wulsin campaign.
First, check out this document—a recent letter from Wulsin expressing interest in the Piketon site (click images to enlarge):
On the second page, as WTF indicates with red, you can see Wulsin agreeing with the idea of reprocessing spent fuel at the Piketon County plant.
In the next document, you can see a letter from the steelworkers union to Wulsin:
Even the unions don’t understand what’s happening, having thought they had Wulsin’s support.
Message to Democrats: If you expect real progressives to vote for your candidates, you’re going to have to do much better than this!
• Share This Article!
Listen to this article
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
03 Nov 2006 at 11:25 am | #
Albert Sabin was blocked by Baratz-type Luddites when he tried to protect us against polio with his live virus vaccine. He was forced to make deal with the Soviets in Russia because of the conspiratorial climate in the US. Crazy!!
Wulsin’s willingness to study the Malariatherapy data should be applauded, not derided. Don’t shoot the messenger. She killed the message, wasn’t that good enough?
Isn’t that what you want?
Baratz’s BIG BROTHER/BIG GOVERNMENT approach is just stupid.
But hey, he’s allowed to write letters to the Ohio Board of Medicine; so can you.
I disagree with his opinion, but I support his right to state it.
03 Nov 2006 at 12:01 pm | #
Wulsin’s willingness to study the Malariatherapy data should be applauded
$10K/month bought a lot of willingness from Wulsin to tout Heimlich’s medical atrocity experiments - somewhat less willingness from to be forthcoming about the facts or to report the Heimlich Institute (Phil Heimlich, VP) and Deaconess Associations to legal oversight authorities. Good for Baratz alerting the law.
Now if only Cincinnati media would pick up their feet. But once again, as in every chapter of Heimlich’s non-stop history of medical quackery - “malariotherapy” horrors, drowning frauds, phony asthma cures - Cincinnati MSM slumbers.
Oh well, what are a few more dead Africans? You’d think the Cincinnati Herald or Nate Livingston, man of few silences, might have something to say about that.
03 Nov 2006 at 02:27 pm | #
Here’s the thing - this is all being brought up in an election year - putting our communities at risk of having someone like ignorant, arrogant Jean Schmidt in office. People who claim to have such a moral interest inthis issue—Where the hell have you been for years? You haven’t cared enough about the people affect orthe implications of the “experiments” until she ran for office. Therefore your interests are biased and prompted only by your desire to influence an election.
And, this is not a new issue. Heimlich is not beyond re-proach - he bought and clawed his way to notoriety. He has been watched like a hawk - the only reason he has gotten away with ANYTHING is because the poweres to be allowed it.
Let me see you guys put this issue high profile —6 months after the election unstead of now - and see if you are sincere or merely politically motivated.
03 Nov 2006 at 02:33 pm | #
mikeR: Baratz’s BIG BROTHER/BIG GOVERNMENT approach is just stupid.
Y’know, maybe Mike’s on to something - just like Drs. Heimlich & Wulsin may be onto something with infecting AIDS patients with malaria.
What do you say we take freemarket Mike’s philosophy to it’s obvious conclusion and eliminate all governmental oversight for doctors. Medical boards? Who needs ‘em? For that matter, let’s get rid of licenses, too. Anyone, even freemarket Mike, will be free to treat patients!
But nothing to worry about, folks. Adam Smith’s invisible hand of the marketplace will take care of any problems. Need proof? Why, just look at how effectively the medical profession, hospitals and health insurance companies police themselves.
If only we could eliminate the oppressive bureaucracy of medical boards and the burden of malpractice laws and patient protections. Then we’d have a flawless system!
03 Nov 2006 at 05:02 pm | #
one advocate: Where the hell have you been for years?
False. The Dean has been covering this story since long before Wulsin announced. The National Council Against Health Fraud has been tracking Heimlich’s “malariotherapy” quackery for over a decade. From 10-30-94 LA Times article, Heimlich’s Audacious Maneuver:
“He is risking people’s lives and he is trading on the life-saving aura of his name to get people to help him,” said Dr. John Renner of the National Council Against Health Fraud, which has been tracking the Heimlich project.
“After this, he won’t go down in history for the Heimlich maneuver. He’ll go down in history as a bizarre, mad scientist.”
Dr. Baratz was also quoted in this 10-30-04 Nashville Tennessean front pager about Henry Heimlich getting kicked out of an international AIDS conference.
You may not like the timing, but these critics of Heimlich and Wulsin have been on this a lot longer than this election cycle.
03 Nov 2006 at 08:14 pm | #
Look, Henry Heimlich is a creep, a nutbar. But Baratz is a prostitute. You’all can frame your moronic arguments however you want.
That quoted LA Times article sums up the scene well.
Anyone who has worked on HIV and sweated over AIDS patients takes this stuff seriously. It’s a huge problem from a health standpoint, an economic standpoint, and a social standpoint.
Nihilism with health isn’t a moral stand. There’s a difference between considering something and doing it.
But perhaps you should go back to your Oprah program - maybe there’s a car under your seat!
04 Nov 2006 at 02:07 am | #
I am a newer user of this blog - so maybe I misspoke. The Dean certainly does a great job of investigatory reporting - and I admire it.
But right now - people who care about people - can not believe for a minute that jean would do harm . she is a disaster.
feeding jean’s campaign right now - just isn’t constructive for AMericans.
and i don’t doubt that there are some issues - but, can we risk re-gaining control of this country for it?
different philosophies - i guess
sorry
and who do you think you got a better chance at getting real address of the issue - with the reps?
04 Nov 2006 at 07:52 am | #
Oooh, the name calling is so painful. Dr. Baratz is a prostitute, Dr. Heimlich is a creep and a nutbar. The journalists at the Beacon are bringing this story to the forefront to discredit a candidate during a political campaign. You people are just mean to ask these questions now while people are paying attention. (you must work for the Schmidt campaign)
The Democratic (corporate) leadership hand picked this candidate from a field of seven and they did it the same way they chose Kerry and Pepper. Who can defeat the opposition? Who has the better chance of raising enough money to win? When they figure out that they can’t predict the future then things will begin to change. What gives the appearance of precognition is just a self fufilling prophesy.
The people want candidates with ideas and credibility. They are not asking for perfection, everybody makes mistakes. What we ask is if you made mistakes, admit it and do better next time. The candidate has spent the last four months in hell because of this issue. Defending her past actions and trying to keep the lid on or gloss this over. She has looked like a cat in a litter box scratching to cover up this story. I hope the future is different but my fear is that we are being presented with the same, lame choices the R & D parties have given us for years.
04 Nov 2006 at 08:04 am | #
one advocate, the Dean has repeatedly stated that he considers Wulsin a preferable candidate to Schmidt.
It appears that, because you support Wulsin over Schmidt, you would prefer that the Dean not report the news that Dr. Baratz filed a licensure complaint against Wulsin with the State Medical Board of Ohio. Is that correct?
I’d like to know how you think the Dean should have handled this story. Bearing in mind that the Dean has been continuously reporting the Wulsin-Heimlich story and has regularly provided Dr. Baratz with a forum since January 2005, it would appear the Dean’s editorial choices were:
1. Run with it.
2. Ignore it.
3. Postpone reporting it until after Election Day.
Which would you prefer?
04 Nov 2006 at 09:01 pm | #
Truth is, I’d prefer he sit on it until after the election. (Gee, I know that makes me bad) And then, if she has really done something horrific- hold her accountable - and, for goodness sake - force her to resign and let the Dems appoint a person without such serious problems. I want this seat to go to the Democrats - that simple. I WILL compromise my standards and bury my head for a while for that to happen. Why? Because the needs of the many out weigh the wants of the few-- kind of.
Our national democracy is being attacked. Signing statements, torture, no habeaus corpus, prohibitions against protesting,—not to mention this war, the unbid contracts, the corruption…
I want my country back Tuesday- I would chose to deal with Wulsin after our nation is secure from this internal attack. Something in the past has no comparison to what is at stake here.
Maybe I’m wrong.
AND AGAIN, I APPLAUD ALL ADVOCATES, RESEARCHERS, INVESTIGATORS, - ALL WHO DEMAND TRUTH AND ACCOUNTABLITY . I APPLAUD YOU ALL! But let’s get our priorities straight and focus on the ball.
05 Nov 2006 at 07:50 am | #
one advocate, thanks for an honest answer. Here’s mine.
There are at least two issues here. One is the Dean’s decision on when to run the story. I think he made the right decision. Withholding news to protect any side’s political interests is a slippery editorial slope. For example, on a regular basis, the Enquirer chooses not to report stories that are bad news for Republican interests. I don’t consider the Dean to be “the other side,” but I do consider him to be an individual who strives to be independent.
The other issue, national party politics, is obviously important. However, I do question whether replacing a corrupt Republican with a corrupt Democrat is a reason to practice censorship. When good people are willing to look the other way simply in order to install anyone simply because they have a (D) or and an (R) after their name, well, maybe that makes them a little less good.
Vic Wulsin was a mediocrity in the medical profession and what she’s doing in politics is a mystery. In fact, I doubt Wulsin herself could provide an answer to that question. Her performance during the campaign resembles a deer caught in the headlights. Every step of the way she’s demonstrated an uncanny ability to mishandle herself, meanwhile appearing utterly unhappy and doing her best to get through it. Maybe she’ll grow into the job, maybe not.
But it appears Wulsin only got the nod because she applied for the job with a bag of cash. Who’s responsible? Tim Burke. Want better (D) candidates? Get rid of Burke.
05 Nov 2006 at 08:50 am | #
While you are discussing this issue, Jean Schmidt is running from it.
She refuses to debate. She’s hiding behind edited blogs like this.
Let’s see. How’s it go? COWARDS CUT AND RUN.
JEAN SCHMIDT IS A COWARD.
She can run, but she can’t hide.
She doesn’t understand the issues. She doesn’t care about Claremont County. She doesn’t care about Eastern Ohio. She doesn’t care about your kids, my kids, kids with AIDS.
She doesn’t give a Schmidt about you. It’s all about JEAN.
06 Nov 2006 at 02:12 am | #
Could this herring be any more red?
In other news, politicians everywhere are seen in political ads with “real people”, suggesting that they care about the little people more than the big money lobbyists that buy each and every one of them. C’mon, if Baratz is going to make an issue of a DOCTOR portraying herself as a DOCTOR, he should have the common courtesy to rail against every other politician who tries to portray him or herself in the best possible light.
The lab coat and the stethoscope are indicative of a trained medical professional, and having gone through the appropriate training regimen, and being duly licensed by the state to practice medicine, she is entitled to portray herself with those symbols most associated with her MD degree.
06 Nov 2006 at 08:18 am | #
The ship of state is sinking and the good people of Ohio are the only ones without a lifeboat. The country/state/county/city are suffering from a bipartisan attack and the people are the victims. The MSM is part of this attack and money rules. The circular flow of “capital” from the special interests to the campaign funds, from the campaigns to the media to saturate our airwaves, back to the source in the form of sweetheart deals and hidden actions that benefit a few.
Wulsin and Schmidt have different talking points but the message is clear. Vote for either of these candidates and you get the same thing in the end, screwed. Is it any wonder that voter turnout is low? Do the people have any voice left? Again, we are left to decide between the lesser of two evils. Wulsin, although a deciever, is my choice because she is not the incumbent and has no experience in Washington.