From: Bart Classen, MD

 Dear Readers,

         Deja vu! It appears that the US government is using the same
tactics that  they used in the past when they lied to the American public about the
 safety of above ground testing of nuclear weapons. The DOD was so paranoid
 about the risk of a nuclear war that they exposed many service men to
 radiation from bombs detonated just miles away. They repeatedly detonated
 nuclear weapons up wind of cities in the southwest. The US government and
 its suppliers as well as friends in academia lied about the risks of
 radiation and withheld data that nuclear fall out was dangerous. They also
 ran illegal experiments and gave people radioactive material in their food
 without their knowledge or consent. This is a historical fact.

         Today the US government as well as suppliers of vaccines and their
 representatives in academia  are making false statement about the safety of
 vaccines. It seems the paranoid people in government have switched their
 attention from nuclear to biological threats. They have even been caught
 running illegal vaccine experiments.

         I have the following statements regarding the DOD's attack on my
research.  You can read my congressional testimony on my website www.vaccines.net

 1. Regarding the link between vaccines and diabetes in the military.

         The DOD clearly misstates my points on the risks of vaccines and
diabetes in the military. My point was that in Sweden the men are drafted,  get
 military vaccines and have twice the risk of diabetes compared to women who
 don't get the vaccines. The difference between the rates of diabetes in men
 and women in Sweden can not be explained by a general increased risk of
 diabetes in men. In the US Navy where men and women both get the military
 vaccines the risk of diabetes is about the same, with the women having a
 25% increased risk. The point being that women may be expected to have an
 equal or greater risk of diabetes then men and thus the increased risk of
 diabetes in men in Sweden would be unexpected except for their increased
 immunization. I also showed that men and women in the navy have an
 increased risk of diabetes compared to civilians who do not receive the
 military vaccines.

 My testimony
         "I have done some preliminary work in military populations looking
for an  increased risk of diabetes following immunization, unfortunately the
 military lacks a sufficient infrastructure to properly evaluate the risk of
  immunization. Several papers have been published indicating that there is
 a very high risk of insulin dependent diabetes in the navy (American J.
 Epidemiology 138:984-987, 1993) and diabetes in the air force (Aviation,
 Space, and Environmental Medicine 66: 1175-1178). The risk seems to
 increase with the time in the military. The paper on insulin dependent
 diabetes in the navy shows that those under 20 who enter the military have
 a similar rate of diabetes to those of similar age in the general US public
 (Diabetes Care 16:841-842, 1993) but those in their 30s, and who presumably
 have been in the military for several years, the rate of diabetes exceeds
 the age specific rate in the general population. Data from Sweden also
 suggests that the military vaccines may be leading to an increased risk of
 diabetes. In Sweden traditionally almost all men, but not women  were
 drafted and received vaccines. The incidence of diabetes in Sweden is about
 the same in men and women prior to the age of the draft, 18. However, the
 incidence of diabetes is about twice as high in men then women between the
 age of  20 and 35 (International Journal of Epidemiology 21:352-358, 1992).
 By contrast in the US navy between the ages of 17 to 34 white women have a
 25% higher rate of insulin dependent diabetes then white men. These data
 support a causal relationship of vaccines on diabetes in the military."

2. Regarding Neal Halsey

         There were two meetings on vaccines and diabetes. There was no
consensus reached in either meeting however people are misrepresenting the truth by
 claiming there was a consensus. Neal Halsey appeared to admit under oath
 that the people at the Johns Hopkins meeting told him they refused to sign
 a consensus statement refuting my findings. Neal Halsey continues to claim
 a consensus however. It was brought up under oath that Neal Halsey's
 vaccine organization was receiving in excess of  $100,000 from vaccine
 manufacturers and the conference was not an objective conference.

         Two month after the Hopkins conference the NIH had a meeting on
vaccines and diabetes. This time the government did not take a vote or ask the
 persons to agree to a consensus. However an unethical government employee
 tried to claim a consensus without every taking a vote. Congressman Henry
 Waxman and I debated the issue of these two meetings. I brought up the
 point that a consensus was not reached at the NIH meeting because no vote
 was taken and that it was dishonest to claim a consensus without taking a
 vote. Congressman Waxman did not disagree with the later.

         I have published many articles linking vaccines and diabetes. In
one study, a clinical trial on the hemophilus vaccine, I showed that the risk
 of the vaccine exceeds the benefit. This is published by the British
 medical Journal  http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/318/7192/1169

 3. Anthrax vaccine.

         The DOD's misrepresents the truth on my statements and my finding
on the anthrax vaccine.  I did research with the anthrax vaccine and concluded
 this was not suitable for  widespread use in humans because it was not
 properly tested and was likely to cause problems. I also stated it would
 cause an increased risk of autoimmune disease when given to adults. My
 animal studies suggests vaccination at birth is associated with a decreased
 risk of diabetes however when the anthrax vaccine is given latter in life
 it will increase the risk of autoimmunity.

 My testimony:

 I studied the ability of  the vaccine to stimulate the immune system in
 ways unrelated to  its protective effects against anthrax.  These
 experiments involved using the anthrax vaccine to alter the risk of
 autoimmune diabetes in the rodents. The data, which has been published in 2
 separate papers (Autoimmunity, 24: 137-145, 1996; Autoimmunity, 27(3):
 135-139, 1998), showed that even low doses of the anthrax vaccine caused
 significant stimulation of the immune system.  I attribute this strong
 effect to the many different immunologically active molecules in the
 vaccine including the aluminum adjuvant. The vaccine is made from an
 unpurified filtrate from bacteria grown in culture media and  thus contains
 many different molecules which can stimulate the immune system.

         My published animal studies indicate that immune stimulatory effect
of the anthrax vaccine is additive with other vaccines such as the diphtheria,
 tetanus and pertussis vaccine.  The results of my studies indicated that
 immunization starting in the first month of life can prevent autoimmune
 disease including diabetes however immunization starting after 2 months
 increases the risk both in humans and animals. My work with anthrax vaccine
 involved giving it in the first month of life however, based on its
 similarity to other vaccines I have studied, it would be expected to
 increase the risk of autoimmunity including diabetes when given to adults.
 This conclusion is supported by a number of human population studies
 (Infectious Diseases in Clinical Practice, 6: 449-454, 1997). I have
 discontinued research on using the anthrax vaccine for preventing diabetes
 based on the risks of giving it to large number of people.

 4. Patents

         The US government deliberately misrepresents my position by citing
 documents drafted by lawyers. My statement on giving anthrax and other
 atypical immunogens (plague, leprosy, yellow fever, HIV) at birth is clear,
 as discussed above. I do not favor this. The government's propaganda
 officers try to misrepresent the truth again. I own some patents but
 patents are worthless unless they are based on important discoveries. The
 US government's continual fixation and statements on my patents is proof
 that I have made important discoveries regarding the effect of vaccines on
 diabetes. Unlike the government employees in the 8 years I have worked on
 this issue I have not made any money but have spent most of my earnings on
 this research.

 5. The CDC

         The CDC did two studies that supports my findings on the risk of
diabetes following immunization. In both CDC studies they showed immunization at
 birth is associated with a decreased risk of diabetes compared to
 immunization starting after 6 weeks of life. In the original study
 (Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Vol 6, Supl 2, S60) the data
 supported my finding that immunization starting after 2 month increases the
 risk of diabetes. They changed the design of the second study as discussed

 My Testimony

         "Employees of the CDC did preliminary studies which supported my
data that  the hepatitis B vaccine was linked to an increased risk of diabetes. In a
 follow up study they changed the study design by adding unorthodox
 mathematical coefficients "fudge factors" to substantially reduce the true
 risk of diabetes associated with  vaccination and  now their data would
 make it appear that the vaccine is safe. Even their new data however
 indicates those receiving the hepatitis B vaccine starting after 2 months
 of life may be at a 50% increased risk of diabetes compared to those
 receiving it at birth. The real tragedy is that our research indicates that
 technology is available to make vaccines much safer but public health
 officials are hindering the development of safer technology by denying
 there are safety problems with existing products. These actions are also
 preventing individuals from receiving the compensation they are entitled
to. "

 6. The DOD studies.

         The DOD has performed studies on biological warfare workers at Fort
 Detrick. The studies are essentially worthless since there was no control
 population and many workers were lost to follow up so one could not
 determine if the rate of autoimmunity was elevated in these workers.

 7. The anthrax vaccine safety studies.

         The anthrax vaccine was approved without every doing a controlled
clinical  study. There is no long term safety data on the anthrax vaccine. The
 government admitted this in congressional hearings. It is a distortion of
 the truth to say there is substantial safety data. The FDA letters I
 presented showed the FDA admitted that no proper studies were ever

 My Testimony

         My research involves studying the long term effect of vaccines on
 autoimmune diseases including diabetes. I began working with the anthrax
 vaccine over 8 years ago. The product I used was produced by the Michigan
 Department of Health which is the same product being given to US military
 personnel. During my studies with the vaccine I did an literature review of
 the vaccine which included retrieving documents on the vaccine from the FDA
 as part of  the freedom of information act. Enclosed are four letters from
 the FDA/Public Health Service (Exhibits dated 2/6/1969; 2/10/1969;
 9/30/1969; 11/2/1970) which clearly reveal that the anthrax vaccine was
 approved for marketing without the manufacturer performing a single
 controlled clinical trial. It is impossible to demonstrate safety and
 efficacy without  performing a clinical trial and the FDA was aware of this
 but approved the vaccine for marketing anyway. I am not aware of any proper
 clinical trials with this anthrax vaccine being performed after marketing
 commenced so strong consideration should be made for removing the vaccine
 from the market until proper clinical trials are performed.

 8. Why can't government employees be honest ?

         Government employees need to be held accountable for their actions.

 My Testimony

         "I am greatly concerned about the safety of the anthrax vaccine and
other  vaccines. It is clear to me that the government's immunization policies,
 both the military and civilian, are driven by politics and not by science.
 I can give numerous examples where employees of the US Public Health
 Service lack a commitment to medical science and instead appear to be
 furthering their careers by acting as propaganda officers to support
 political agendas. In one case I can demonstrate that employees of a
 foreign government, who were funded and working closely with the US Public
 Health Service, submitted false data to a major medical journal. The true
 data indicated the vaccine was dangerous however the false data that was
 submitted indicated there was no risk. An employee of the NIH who manages
 large vaccine grants jointly published an  misleading letter about the
 subject with one of these foreign civil servants. As you are aware it is
 illegal to falsify data from research funded by the US government.

         In May employees of the US Public Health Service assured
Congressman Mica's subcommittee that the hepatitis B vaccine was safe. Weeks later the
 US Public Health Service changed its hepatitis B immunization policy
 because there was too much mercury in the vaccine. It is hard to imagine
 they did not know a problem existed when they tried to convince Congressman
 Mica that the vaccine was safe. Employees of the CDC did preliminary
 studies which supported my data that the hepatitis B vaccine was linked to
 an increased risk of diabetes. In a follow up study they changed the study
 design by adding unorthodox mathematical coefficients "fudge factors" to
 substantially reduce the true risk of diabetes associated with  vaccination
 and  now their data would make it appear that the vaccine is safe. Even
 their new data however indicates those receiving the hepatitis B vaccine
 starting after 2 months of life may be at a 50% increased risk of diabetes
 compared to those receiving it at birth. The real tragedy is that our
 research indicates that technology is available to make vaccines much safer
 but public health officials are hindering the development of safer
 technology by denying there are safety problems with existing products.
 These actions are also preventing individuals from receiving the
 compensation they are entitled to.

         I have several recommendations. First, there is a need to hire a
special  prosecutor to determine if public health officials are following the laws
 enacted to ensure vaccines are safe and if  public health officials along
 with manufacturers are misleading the public about the safety of these
 products. France investigated the actions of its public health officials
 and found they had not followed the law in ensuring the safety of
 biological products. After the imprisonment of several public health
 officials in France, government employees have taken a leadership position
 in vaccine safety as demonstrated by their discontinuing school age
 hepatitis B vaccination."

         For more information please see my website www.vaccines.net

                               Bart Classen