Hans Ruesch quotes
Hans Ruesch
To teach the Rockefeller drug ideology, it is necessary to teach that Nature didn't know what she was doing when she made the human body.-------Hans Ruesch
“The history of the publication of this book (Slaughter of the Innocent) provides some valuable and frightening insight into the methods and power wielded by vivisectionists and their allies; how they were able to squelch a book already printed and make it disappear — at least for a time……Rizzoli, Italy's largest publisher, had been forced to suppress the book shortly after its publication in 1976.......Bantam did not reply to charges that they were deliberately suppressing the book---until 3 years later, when an executive stated that it had been allowed to go out of print "because it wasn't selling". Yet Bantam's Fall 1978 catalogue listed Slaughter among their bestsellers. How could a publisher of such prominence to so pressured?.....So in Western democracies, no book burnings are necessary; there are subtler and more effective ways to stifle information unfavourable to the industrial powers-that-be.” Hans Ruesch
"Even the most independent newspapers are dependent on their press associations for their national news. And there is no reason for a news editor to suspect that a story cooking over the wires of the Associated Press, the United Press or the International News Service, is censored when it concerns health matters. Yet this is what happens constantly... The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the organ of the Medical Syndicate in the U.S., had bragged as far back as January 20, 1940, that the United Press had been induced to issue a directive requiring all articles on cures and human health to ‘be cleared’ through its New York bureau and ‘science editors.’"---Hans Ruesch, 1982 (Naked Empress p102)
"In the course of a vaccination trial that took place in France on October 1st, 1981, Professor Mercie, former director of the glamorous Pasteur Institute, was asked why the Institute kept producing and selling its anti-'flu vaccine despite its recognized worthlessness. Professor Mercie's candid reply: 'Because it helps financing the Institute's research'." - (Hans Ruesch, Naked Empress p81)
"Experimental cancer has become a source of solid gold without precedence (Slaughter p18)." Hans Ruesch
"This item concerns payments made to U.S. Lawmakers by organizations interested in keeping the present fraudulent medical system going. I have reported that American special interest groups ‘showered a record 22.6 million on candidates in 1976 and that the top donors were the medical associations with $1,790,879."--Hans Ruesch, medical editor and historian, 1978 (Slaughter of the Innocent p418)
The vaccination myth is the most widespread superstition modern medicine
has managed to impose, but, being by the same token the most profitable, it will
prove to be also one of the most enduring, though there was never the slightest of
scientific evidence upholding it. Suffice it to say now that the various epidemics have experienced in all
countries the same natural evolution of growth, decline, and eventual
disappearance, whether vaccination or other therapies had been introduced or
not. The only demonstrable effects were the widespread damages caused by the
various vaccinations, none excluded.
Most pediatricians we know in Italy and France do not vaccinate their own
children, although they cannot refuse to vaccinate their clients' children, if
they want to retain their union licence to practice........
So it can safely be predicted that the advertised belief in the alleged
blessings of vaccination will be among the last deadly rites of Modern Medicine
to go, because it is far too profitable to the medical combine to be allowed to
go without a bitter struggle, of which the beginnings can increasingly be seen
today, but which will certainly drag on into the coming century. It is indeed so
profitable - to Industry and State - that it is incentivated by being offered, or
imposed, in many cases free of charge. But in truth, who gets the bill? The taxpayer, of course.
Preface by Hans Ruesch to 1000 Doctors (and
many more) Against Vivisection
Vivisection: The Psychopathic Aspect. Sadism is a very ugly word, which serves to define a very ugly psychopathy - a mental disease. Vivisectors have been known to accept with equanimity the allegation of being money grubbers - of doing cruel experiments only to gain money or a professorship. But we have never known a vivisector who bore with equanimity the allegation of being a sadist. They always reacted to all such allegations with frothing, like other psychopaths when they are confronted with the nature of their disorder. If it is a mistake to believe that all vivisectors are sadists, it would be another mistake to believe that sadism is not rampant in the animal laboratories. It is. In fact, for men and women (more men, as a rule) who are affected by this grave psychopathy (mental malady), and on top of it are animal haters, what kind of remunerated occupation could be more gratifying than a job in a vivisection laboratory? Preface by Hans Ruesch to 1000 Doctors (and many more) Against Vivisection
"Dr Colin
Blakemore, a 28-year-old Cambridge physiologist, told the British
Association for the Advancement of Science in Leicester how he sewed up the eyes
of 35 kittens, allegedly to find a way to cure squints. He found out that cats
with one eye sewn up shortly after birth could not see out of it when the
stitches were removed. Neither could cats which had both eyes sewn up. In an
interview to the London Daily Mirror (Sept. 6, 1972), Dr Blakemore defended his
experiments as 'ethical' because 'kittens like living in the dark'.
He said that he was an animal
lover, 'like most scientists who work with animals', and added : 'Cats make
ideal subjects, because their eyes are more like humans' than those of other
animals.'
Utter nonsense, of course. Cats'
eyes differ radically from ours, both in structure and reactions : They see in
the dark and we don't, theirs remain closed long after birth and ours open up,
their pupil is vertical and ours horizontal, theirs must focus on a particular
object at a distance while ours have a wide-angle view, they have even been
recently discovered to have cells which in all other animals occur in the ear
only, etc. There couldn't be, in fact, a more different eye from ours than the
cat's. But with the pretext of the greatest similarity with man, every kind of
animal has been used-- from the mouse to the pig to the elephant.
The kittens used in Blakemore's
experiments were 'humanely' destroyed after 16 weeks. 'I would have liked to
keep them alive for further study, as they do in America,' Dr Blakemore added
ruefully. 'But they had to be destroyed under a Home Office ruling.'"---In
1976, in Slaughter of the Innocent, Hans Ruesch