Archive for Malcolm Potts

Planned Parenthood uses Black Woman to push Depo-Provera

Posted in Depo-Provera, Planned Parenthood and Black Women, Planned Parenthood Contraception, Planned Parenthood Depro with tags , , , , , , on December 3, 2013 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood pushes Depro with black womanJPG

The largest provider of abortions, founded in Eugenics and Racism is selling Birth Control and specifically the racist Depo-Provera using a black woman.

According to the Rebecca Project, Planned Parenthood, one of the largest distributors and providers of Depo Provera in the US and internationally, recklessly promots Depo Provera to a target audience of women of color and asking this question on their website: “What are the Benefits of the Birth Control Shot?” and answering: “There is nothing to do right before having sex”. When in fact using Depo Provera especially warrants condom use before having sex to avoid increased risks of HIV, as verified by esteemed BMGF and NIH funded researcher, Renee Heffron. Furthermore, Planned Parenthood violates medical ethics and FDA regulations by fraudulently promoting an off-label claim: “The shot [Depo Provera] can help prevent cancer of the lining of the uterus” However, a search of Depo Provera’s FDA approval does not list the contraceptive as a cancer prevention drug. Moreover, while making those false claims about Depo Provera, Planned Parenthood further violates FDA regulations by not posting and informing women of mandatory FDA Depo Provera warnings this together with other egregious violations of federal law, demonstrates Planned Parenthood’s intent to misinform and conceal serious harm from women. This systematic fraudulent promotion and illegal rebranding of Depo Provera supported by BMGF, Pfizer, Population Council and USAID, while receiving Medicaid payments and other disbursements from the US government in forms of grants and payments for family planning, is illegal under the False Claims Act (FCA), 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 – 3733 (details discussed on page 14 -15).

Planned Parenthood pushes Depro

According to University of Cincinnati historian Wendy Kline, the Depro testing of the 1970s at Atlanta’s Grady Memorial Hospital Family Planning Clinic involved mostly black women in public assistance.

Kline’s research into the debate surrounding Depo-Provera in the 1970s and 1980s began when she was visiting the Smith College Women’s History Archive where she found a large box of materials still unprocessed and not yet catalogued. This was among 50 to 60 boxes from the National Women’s Health Network.

She recalled, “The box contained hundreds of individual files, each detailing a woman’s difficulties with the side effects of Depo-Provera or detailing how she had not been informed of those side effects or detailing how she had been given the injection without her consent or by means of manipulation. This coercion, lack of informed consent and testing of the drug has obviously been gathered together in preparation for a class-action suit by the National Women’s Health Network that had never gone forward.”

But the collection did provide Kline with a rich source of material of examining the history of this contraceptive and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s public board of inquiry on Depo-Provera held in 1983.

“The use of Depo-Provera captures all of the controversy of this century regarding controlling fertility and who’s ultimately making the decision about who gets to reproduce. My research looks at coercion, risks not fully understood and how arguments were made for and against Depo-Provera at the time,” she explained.

For instance, it was in the Depo-Provera hearings in Washington that the manufacturer and those in favor of the drug had to first contend with the greater organizational powers and force of the feminist movement – but where that feminist movement had to argue its case by focusing narrowly on the flaws in the scientific research methodology applied when testing Depo-Provera.

In other words, those combating the use of Depo-Provera could not make a case against the drug based on morality or sentiment even though it could easily have been argued that this was a case of eugenics since the testing of the drug in the 1970s at Atlanta’s Grady Memorial Hospital Family Planning Clinic involved mostly black women in public assistance.

Instead, because of FDA strictures related to evidence supplied at its board of inquiry hearings, opponents of the drug had to channel their arguments on the science then available on Depo-Provera.

“Of course,” said Kline, “It was and is very difficult to separate science from the society that produced it. There was a reason, given the understood risks of Depo-Provera, that its testing was done on poor women in the U.S. and on women in developing countries.”

According to C-Fam, the Melinda Gates’ campaign targeting African women with a new form of the contraceptive Depo Provera has provoked a coalition of Black religious leaders and human rights advocates. They are asking the U.S. Congress to stop funding the distribution of the injectable contraceptive overseas.

The leaders, who support abortion and contraception, say women of color and low-income women suffer severe health issues from Depo Provera. A new self-administered version puts women at further risk as it will be delivered without them being fully informed of the drug’s potential side effects. The contraceptive carries the potential to contract or transmit HIV at an eight-fold higher rate.

The wife of billionaire Bill Gates recently told the New York Times that she championed family planning after meeting with poor women in developing countries. The women wanted a contraceptive that comes in a shot, Gates said, because they could not negotiate condom use without implying that either they or their husbands had AIDS.

Kwame Fosu says Melinda Gates’ claim that women want Depo Provera is “disingenuous.”

“No African woman would agree to being injected if she had full knowledge of the contraceptives’ dangerous side effects,” Fosu told the Friday Fax. Fosu is policy director for the Rebecca Project for Human Rights.

“In fact,” he continued, “in countries where women are educated on the harmful complications, Depo Provera use is negligible.”

Gates’ comments illustrate an on-going conflict between public health officials’ efforts to contain the AIDS epidemic and family planning advocates who favor long-acting hormonal contraceptives to prevent pregnancy. Unlike condoms, these methods do nothing to prevent HIV transmission.

In the case of Depo Provera, the risks of HIV transmission actually increase, according to data published in The Lancet. The World Health Organization strongly advises that women using progestogen-only injectable contraception also use condoms. Planned Parenthood – one of the largest international distributors of Depo Provera – does not recommend condom use nor do they disclose potential side effects.

According to feminist, Erica Gollub, Depo-Provera, was manufactured by the Upjohn Corporation of Kalamazoo, Michigan has been a source of controversy since its entry into the market in the late 1970s.

In 1978, the FDA found the injectable drug too dangerous for use by American women. FDA’s decision was based on a study done by Upjohn at the agency’s request, which found that rhesus monkeys and beagles injected with the drug developed cancer.

But the agency came under heavy fire from other governmental and private agencies involved in the drug’s distribution in the Third World. Led by the Agency for International Development (AID), these groups feared the impact of the FDA decision on the “image” of Depo and family planning programs abroad. They also opposed any constraints on its overseas distribution.

After years of delay, the FDA finally agreed to hearings on the drug. From the beginning, Upjohn insisted on a scientific inquiry, an approach that limited the scope of issues considered – particularly the more significant ethical and policy considerations raised by the use and promotion of the drug. Nevertheless, evidence presented by opponents of the drug showed that Depo-Provera is considerably more dangerous than Upjohn is willing to admit.

Dr. Christopher Rhodes, called to testify by the National Women’s Health Network, listed the “constellation of defects” that women can experience, ranging from severe menstrual irregularities to permanent sterility to high blood pressure and blood clots. Sybil Shainwal, president of the Network, accused Upjohn of “risking the health of American women with a drug that has never been proven safe.” Public Citizen’s Health Research Group charged that “no reliable studies” have been done on the long-term use of Depo on humans.

In defense, Upjohn cited the conclusions of “three international panels of experts” associated with AID and the World Health Organization. These groups claim that animal studies – the basis of nearly all the evidence on Depo – are “inappropriate” for judging the drug’s effects on women.

But Steve Minkin, former Chief Officer of Nutrition at AID quoted studies from the Office of Technology Assessment and the National Research Council affirming the reliability of animals in cancer research. Minkin worked with some of the first Depo users in Bangladesh in 1979.

National Women’s Health Network witness Dr. Ruth Shearer also disagreed with Upjohn’s “experts.” A cancer and genetics expert, Shearer charged that the AID and WHO groups “were not impartial panels of concerned scientists. They represent organizations which have been responsible for widespread use of Depo Provera.” If they admitted to the hazardous nature of the drug, she said, they “would be admitting their responsibility for future massive human illness.”

Another issue raised at the hearings concerned the use of Depo on women whom doctors say cannot be “trusted” with other forms of contraception. Depo critics have charged that the drug has been used on “powerless groups” such as mentally retarded women and welfare mothers. At the hearings, witnesses described two groups recently “targeted” by doctors: the predominantly Hispanic population at University of Southern California Medical Center in Los Angeles, and the “SS-95%” Black population at Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta.

According to Dr. Robert Hatcher of Grady, 11,000 women have been treated with Depo at his hospital since 1967. Usage started several years before any animal testing had taken place.

Dr. Sidney Wolfe of the Health Research Group found this double standard of safety “morally offensive and unacceptable.” Mentally retarded women, said Wolfe, are “the least appropriate candidates for a contraceptive such as Depo-Provera. (They) are the least likely to be able to weigh the benefits and the risks of the drug and give true informed consent.”

But Dr. Hatcher and other family planning practitioners said that their consent form and information booklet accompanying the shot justifies the use of the drug. “Our booklet mentions 11 problems related to Depo-Provera,” Hatcher said. He reasoned that as long as women “know” what they’re getting, the injection should be used.

Dr. Wolfe, however, pointed out that “the whole question of informed consent is a moot question” since the full extent of risk is still unknown. Another witness cited how the drug is administered at one clinic in northern Thailand, where women “are processed in from 60 to 90 seconds,” with little time for “amenities” like consent.

Some population officials used the consent argument to attack the opponents of Depo. Dr. Malcolm Potts of Family Health International said that anti-Depo forces “oppose people having a choice” in contraception. “I see modes of contraception like modes of transportation,” said Potts, and compared Depo with a Volkswagon: “It’s sturdy, dependable, it might rattle and does have some problems, but it should be available.”

But health activists countered that these same “pro-choice” officials spend little time and money promoting the safer, barrier methods of contraception, and often endorse money or food “incentives” for Third World women “choosing injection or sterilization”. “Their priority,” said one activist, “is expediency in population control.

A number of consumer, women’s and human rights groups are mobilizing to stop the spread of Depo-Provera. The National Women’s Health Network maintains a registry of women having received unauthorized shots of Depo, which they say circulates in the blood for three months or longer. The Network recently announced their intention to sue Upjohn for compensation to women injured by the drug.

United Presbyterian Church and the Maryknoll Fathers, members of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, have recently submitted a shareholder resolution to Upjohn concerning Depo. Other groups working on the issue include Public Citizen’s Health Research Group and the Boston Women’s Health Book Collective.

Whatever the outcome of the Depo hearings, Upjohn has little to lose and much to gain. FDA approval would mean greater sales for the company on a product whose annual sales already exceed $25 million.

Ex Planned Parenthood leader and Eugenics Review writer eyes African Countries for population control

Posted in Abortion, African Countries, African Nations, Eugenics, Malcolm Potts, Planned Parenthood in African Nations, Population Control, Population Council, United Nations with tags , , , , , , , , , , on May 12, 2011 by saynsumthn

Malcolm Potts was the first Medical Director of the eugenics founded International Planned Parenthood Federation and is known for introducing family planning methods into scores of developing countries. Potts once said that “Abortion is an essential element in human fertility control…The combination of abortion contraception is the combination which all human communities always used to control their fertility.”
In addition, Potts was a frequent writer in the “Eugenics Review

But a May 11,2011 article published on NPR’s blog and entitled: Foreign Policy: Without Birth Control, Planet Doomed (Written by:Malcolm Potts and Martha Campbell) states that , “ Across much of the world, women are having fewer children, but in African countries, the decline is far slower than expected. Part of this shift was supposed to come from preferences about family size and better access to family planning to make that possible. Sadly, however, that access hasn’t come… Rapid population growth is bad news for the continent, as it will likely outstrip gains in economic development. It’s also a wake-up call: If the world doesn’t begin investing far more seriously in family planning, much of our progress fighting poverty in sub-Saharan Africa over the last half-century could be lost…Some of the countries in sub-Saharan Africa, especially those making up the Sahel bordering the Sahara desert, face particularly somber demographic problems. In Niger, the rate of population growth exceeds economic growth. Twenty percent of women there have 10 or more children, and only one in 1,000 women completes secondary school. Already, one-third of children in Niger are malnourished, and global warming will further undermine agricultural output in the desertifying Sahel. Even if the current birth rate is halved by 2050, the population will still explode — from 14 million today to 53 million by 2050. If the birth rate continues at current levels, the population could reach a totally unsustainable 80 million. Unless there is an immediate commitment to family planning, the scale of human suffering over the next three decades in the Sahel could equal or exceed that caused by HIV/AIDS in the past 30 years.…Ironically, the future problem stems from today’s success: Women are not having more children than in the past, but fewer of them are dying….Persistently high fertility yields some striking statistics, according to Babatunde Osotimehin, the executive director of the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA). Last month he called for urgent action to meet the needs of “some 215 million women in developing countries, who want to plan and space their births, [but] do not have access to modern contraception.” He added that “neglect of sexual and reproductive health results in an estimated 80 million unintended pregnancies; 22 million unsafe abortions; and 358,000 deaths from maternal causes — including 47,000 deaths from unsafe abortion.”…after much attention to population control in the 1970s, interest began to wane in the 1990s….the word “population” became tainted with the idea that improving access to birth control was tantamount to coercion. The term “family planning” was replaced by the broader phrase “reproductive health.” In the United States, in particular, passions over abortion eroded support for contraceptives assistance overseas.…When a modest investment was made in family planning in Kenya in the 1980s, for example, the average family size fell from eight to five. When the focus was taken off family planning, this decline stalled and even started rising again. …We’ve now been warned. If measures are taken now, we could still keep the 2050 world population at around 8 billion. We have to ensure that the population can be slowed by purely voluntary means and within a human rights framework. We need to galvanize the political will to make it happen and invest now so that family planning options are universally available. Fail to do so, and we may give birth to a new, difficult era of poverty instead.”

In 1967 president, Lyndon B. Johnson made this statement LBJ Faces up a Crisis: Johnson also stated, “Nations with food deficits must put more of their resources into voluntary family planning programs.” ( SOURCE: Lewiston Evening Journal – Feb 2, 1967 , from Johnson’s 1967 State of the Union Address )

On December 10, 1974, the United States National Security Council promulgated National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM-200), also called The Kissinger Report. This document explicitly laid out a detailed strategy by which the United States would aggressively promote population control in developing nations in order to regulate (or have better access to) the natural resources of these countries.

In order to protect U.S. commercial interests, NSSM-200 cited a number of factors that could interrupt the smooth flow of materials from lesser-developed countries, LDCs as it called them, to the United States, including a large population of anti-imperialist youth, who must, according to NSSM-200, be limited by population control. The document identified 13 nations by name that would be primary targets of U.S.-funded population control efforts.

According to NSSM-200, elements of the implementation of population control programs could include: a) the legalization of abortion; b) financial incentives for countries to increase their abortion, sterilization and contraception-use rates; c) indoctrination of children; and d) mandatory population control, and coercion of other forms, such as withholding disaster and food aid unless an LDC implements population control programs.

While the CIA and Departments of State and Defense have issued hundreds of papers on population control and national security, the U.S. government has never renounced NSSM-200, but has only amended certain portions of its policy. NSSM-200, therefore, remains the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government.

Then….In 1969, Alan Guttmacher as then President of Planned Parenthood-World Population and former Vice President of the American Eugenics Society, said this: “ I would like to give our voluntary means of population control full opportunity in the next 10 to 12 years. Then , if these don’t succeed, we may have to go into some kind of coercion, not worldwide, but possibly in such places as India, Pakistan, and Indonesia, where pressures are the greatest…There is no question that birth rates can be reduced all over the world if legal abortion is introduced…” ( SOURCE: Family Planning: The needa and the Methods, by: Alan F. Guttmacher; The American Journal of Nursing, Vol. 69, No. 6. (June, 1969) PP. 1229-1234)

Followed by this statement, made by Planned Parenthood and the Eugenics Society’s Alan Guttmacher in a 1970 interview with the Baltimore Magazine ,
Our birth rate has come down since we last talked.. I think we’ve hit a plateau- the figure’s not likely to drop much more unless there is more legal abortion. , or abortion on request as we call it…My own feeling is that we’ve got to pull out all the stops and involve the United Nations…If you’re going to curb population, it’s extremely important not to have it done by the dammed Yankees, but by the UN. Because the thing is, then it’s not considered genocide. If the United States goes to the Black man or the yellow man and says slow down your reproduction rate, we’re immediately suspected of having ulterior motives to keep the white man dominant in the world. If you can send in a colorful UN force, you’ve got much better leverage.”

After years of “Sending in a colorful UN Force” and “Implementing NSSM200, the Eugenic master plan seems to be failing. In the spotlight are African Nations. According to a recent report by the United Nations: the New York Times is showcasing the “grisly numbers.”

In the NY Times article: U.N. Forecasts 10.1 Billion People by Century’s End, they report that “the population of the world, long expected to stabilize just above 9 billion in the middle of the century, will instead keep growing and may hit 10.1 billion by the year 2100.”

And who is the main culprit? The NY Times and the UN Report continue:
Growth in Africa remains so high that the population there could more than triple in this century, rising from today’s one billion to 3.6 billion, the report said — a sobering forecast for a continent already struggling to provide food and water for its people.

And just whom does the New York Times go to for a response, none other than the Eugenics based Population Council: Frederic Osborn was a founding member of the American Eugenics Society and co-founder of the Population Council along with John D. Rockefeller. In 1969, the Population Council’s President, Bernard Berelson, published an article suggesting that if voluntary methods of birth control were not successful, it may become necessary for the government to put a “fertility control agent” in the water supplies of “urban” neighborhoods.

Ever heard of John C. Cutler? He was the author of the controversial Guatemala syphilis study he served as both assistant surgeon general of the U.S. Public Health Service and deputy director of the Pan American Health Organization. The US recently apologized for Cutler’s actions after it was exposed that U.S. government medical researchers intentionally infected hundreds of people in Guatemala, including institutionalized mental patients, with gonorrhea and syphilis without their knowledge or permission more than 60 years ago.Cutler’s wife , Eliese S. Cutler, told the University of Pittsburgh that John understood the importance of population control – which she called, one of her husband’s passions. John C. Cutler’s wife admitted that she has served on several boards, including Planned Parenthood, an organization whose founders (Margaret Sanger) , past presidents, and many board members were seeped in eugenics ideals which are very racist.. Eliese and her husband John both contributed to the Population Council .

So- that VERY same Population Council , now the “expert” on Population Control Issues had this to say to the NY Times:
“Every billion more people makes life more difficult for everybody — it’s as simple as that,” said John Bongaarts, a demographer at the Population Council, a research group in New York. “Is it the end of the world? No. Can we feed 10 billion people? Probably. But we obviously would be better off with a smaller population.”

The article continues:
The director of the United Nations population division, Hania Zlotnik, said the world’s fastest-growing countries, and the wealthy Western nations that help finance their development, face a choice about whether to renew their emphasis on programs that encourage family planning.
Though they were a major focus of development policy in the 1970s and 1980s, such programs have stagnated in many countries, caught up in ideological battles over abortion, sex education and the role of women in society. Conservatives have attacked such programs as government meddling in private decisions, and in some countries, Catholic groups fought widespread availability of birth control. And some feminists called for less focus on population control and more on empowering women.
Over the past decade, foreign aid to pay for contraceptives — $238 million in 2009 — has barely budged, according to United Nations estimates. The United States has long been the biggest donor, but the budget compromise in Congress last month cut international family planning programs by 5 percent.
“The need has grown, but the availability of family planning services has not,” said Rachel Nugent, an economist at the Center for Global Development in Washington, a research group.
Dr. Zlotnik said in an interview that the revised numbers were based on new forecasting methods and the latest demographic trends. But she cautioned that any forecast looking 90 years into the future comes with many caveats.
That is particularly so for some fast-growing countries whose populations are projected to skyrocket over the next century. For instance, Yemen, a country whose population has quintupled since 1950, to 25 million, would see its numbers quadruple again, to 100 million, by century’s end, if the projections prove accurate. Yemen already depends on food imports and faces critical water shortages.
In Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, the report projects that population will rise from today’s 162 million to 730 million by 2100. Malawi, a country of 15 million today, could grow to 129 million, the report projected.

The implicit, and possibly questionable, assumption behind these numbers is that food and water will be available for the billions yet unborn, and that potential catastrophes including climate change, wars or epidemics will not serve as a brake on population growth. “It is quite possible for several of these countries that are smallish and have fewer resources, these numbers are just not sustainable,” Dr. Zlotnik said.
Well-designed programs can bring down growth rates even in the poorest countries. Provided with information and voluntary access to birth-control methods, women have chosen to have fewer children in societies as diverse as Bangladesh, Iran, Mexico, Sri Lanka and Thailand.

AND
“West and Central Africa are the two big regions of the world where the fertility transition is happening, but at a snail’s pace,” said John F. May, a World Bank demographer.

According to the United Nation’s report, High-fertility countries are mostly concentrated in Africa (39 out of the 55 countries in the continent have high fertility), but there are also nine in Asia, six in Oceania and four in Latin America.

It is always interesting to me how African nations are the culprits of the upcoming disaster of population explosions. Maybe this is why in America the Eugenics Founded Planned Parenthood Group targets Black Neighborhoods with their centers…as explains in the film: Maafa21.

The recently released documentary about Eugenics in America called- Maafa21 also focused on the way it targets third world countries. In the Maafa21 DVD evidence that the former Office of Population head for the United States, RT Ravenholt, says he wants to sterilize one-forth of the World’s population, and was “honored by Planned Parenthood” is just more proof of this eugenics agenda !

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Maafa 21 PT 11, posted with vodpod

Prior to this POPULATION CONTROL article targeting African Nations…. the former eugenics founded Planned Parenthood medical director , Malcolm Potts insulted the Philippines by saying that if it fails to check its runaway population growth, the Philippines could fall into the category of impoverished Somalia in Africa.

Dr Malcolm Potts said that due to its ballooning population, there would be about 160 million Filipinos, from the estimated 94 million today, in the next 40 years which could pose a huge problem of how to feed, clothe, educate and house them.

Potts then pushed the abortion agenda and cited the urgent need for the country to enact the controversial reproductive health or family planning bill which has been pending in Congress for the past eight years due to strong opposition from the Catholic Church and its supporters.

“…Unless you are able to offer the poorest living on about $1 a day the choices they deserve, then people will be poorer, you will be importing food, you will (be) more like Somalia than like Thailand,” Potts warned.

He emphasized that a reduction in the birth rate could stimulate economic growth by having more people in the work force than dependents.

The Philippine Daily Inquirer, reported in the story: Population expert draws flak for forecast By Michael Lim Ubac, and dated: /20/2010 that a leader in the Philippine House of Representatives sought the deportation of Malcolm Potts over his prediction that the Philippine population would reach 160 million in 40 years, possibly causing the country to become a failed state like Somalia.

Parañaque Representative Roilo Golez, who is vigorously opposing the reproductive health (RH) bill is expected to make formal next week his request to deport Potts over the remarks the latter made on Thursday as one of the organizers of the population conference at the Asian Institute of Management in Makati City.

Potts, airing his opinions freely at the conference, said the Philippines would suffer far worse economic, environmental and even national security problems if the population would reach a projected 160 million by 2050.

Unless the RH bill goes through and unless you are able to offer the poorest economic quintile the choices that they deserve, then people will be poorer. You will be importing food, you will be more like Somalia than Thailand,” Potts had warned.

A peeved Golez said Potts, a “supposed population expert” from the Bixby Center for Population, Health and Sustainability of the University of California, “practices and promotes abortion which is illegal in the Philippines.”

In 1972, (Potts) was the first physician to promote the technique of uterine manual vacuum aspiration,” said Golez, who did not bother to explain this medical procedure aimed at aborting pregnancies.

Golez also said that in a June 2010 article in the European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care, Mr. Potts was quoted to have stated the following: “I look at abortion from the perspective of a doctor who has performed abortions … I was perhaps the first Western physician to do outpatient vacuum aspiration abortions under local anesthesia.”

Abortion is legal under various circumstances in many countries.

But Golez added that Potts also “insulted the Philippines by comparing us to super backward Somalia whose economy is based on virtually livestock only, compared to our sophisticated industry, not to mention their long history of civil wars and warlordism.

The lawmaker, a former national security adviser during the Arroyo administration, cited the Philippine population density, which is around 266 persons per sq. km. compared to Somalia’s tiny density of only 12 persons per sq. km.

And that’s where Somalia’s big problem is—they lack the population to do any major economic activity,” claimed Golez.

Malcolm Potts, M.B., B.Chir, Ph.D., F.R.C.O.G. (b. 1935) served as medical director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation from 1968 to 1972, and as president of Family Health International from 1978 to 1990.

Population Control needed in the Philippines? So claims a former eugenics founded Planned Parenthood medical director !

Posted in Eugenics, Hispanic, Immigration, Malcolm Potts with tags , , , , , , , , on November 20, 2010 by saynsumthn

Malcolm Potts was the first Medical Director of the eugenics founded International Planned Parenthood Federation and is known for introducing family planning methods into scores of developing countries. Potts once said that “Abortion is an essential element in human fertility control…The combination of abortion contraception is the combination which all human communities always used to control their fertility.”
In addition, Potts was a frequent writer in the “Eugenics Review

Now… the former eugenics founded Planned Parenthood medical director has insulted the Philippines by saying that if it fails to check its runaway population growth, the Philippines could fall into the category of impoverished Somalia in Africa.

Dr Malcolm Potts said that due to its ballooning population, there would be about 160 million Filipinos, from the estimated 94 million today, in the next 40 years which could pose a huge problem of how to feed, clothe, educate and house them.

Potts then pushed the abortion agenda and cited the urgent need for the country to enact the controversial reproductive health or family planning bill which has been pending in Congress for the past eight years due to strong opposition from the Catholic Church and its supporters.

“…Unless you are able to offer the poorest living on about $1 a day the choices they deserve, then people will be poorer, you will be importing food, you will (be) more like Somalia than like Thailand,” Potts warned.

He emphasised that a reduction in the birth rate could stimulate economic growth by having more people in the work force than dependents.

The Philippine Daily Inquirer, reported in the story: Population expert draws flak for forecast By Michael Lim Ubac, and dated: /20/2010 that a leader in the Philippine House of Representatives sought the deportation of Malcolm Potts over his prediction that the Philippine population would reach 160 million in 40 years, possibly causing the country to become a failed state like Somalia.

Parañaque Representative Roilo Golez, who is vigorously opposing the reproductive health (RH) bill is expected to make formal next week his request to deport Potts over the remarks the latter made on Thursday as one of the organizers of the population conference at the Asian Institute of Management in Makati City.

Potts, airing his opinions freely at the conference, said the Philippines would suffer far worse economic, environmental and even national security problems if the population would reach a projected 160 million by 2050.

Unless the RH bill goes through and unless you are able to offer the poorest economic quintile the choices that they deserve, then people will be poorer. You will be importing food, you will be more like Somalia than Thailand,” Potts had warned.

A peeved Golez said Potts, a “supposed population expert” from the Bixby Center for Population, Health and Sustainability of the University of California, “practices and promotes abortion which is illegal in the Philippines.”

In 1972, (Potts) was the first physician to promote the technique of uterine manual vacuum aspiration,” said Golez, who did not bother to explain this medical procedure aimed at aborting pregnancies.

Golez also said that in a June 2010 article in the European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Health Care, Mr. Potts was quoted to have stated the following: “I look at abortion from the perspective of a doctor who has performed abortions … I was perhaps the first Western physician to do outpatient vacuum aspiration abortions under local anesthesia.”

Abortion is legal under various circumstances in many countries.

But Golez added that Potts also “insulted the Philippines by comparing us to super backward Somalia whose economy is based on virtually livestock only, compared to our sophisticated industry, not to mention their long history of civil wars and warlordism.

The lawmaker, a former national security adviser during the Arroyo administration, cited the Philippine population density, which is around 266 persons per sq. km. compared to Somalia’s tiny density of only 12 persons per sq. km.

And that’s where Somalia’s big problem is—they lack the population to do any major economic activity,” claimed Golez.

When you study the roots of Planned Parenthood and their links to eugenics you can understand how Malcolm Potts would think that it is his business to push “eugenics” and population control on the rest of the world…watch Maafa21 to learn more (clip below)

Malcolm Potts, M.B., B.Chir, Ph.D., F.R.C.O.G. (b. 1935) served as medical director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation from 1968 to 1972, and as president of Family Health International from 1978 to 1990.

Kristof’s Error: Population Control is an Easy, but Wrong Solution

Posted in Abortion, Black Women, Brian Clowes, China One Child Policy, Czar, Ehrlich, Eugenics, Holdren, NSSM200, Planned Parenthood with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 1, 2010 by saynsumthn

Commentary by Bryan Clowes, Research Manager, Human Life International
October 1, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Nicholas Kristof’s entire article “Birth Control over Baldness” [New York Times, Sept. 25, 2010] is constructed around a single sentence: “It’s impossible to fight poverty effectively when birthrates are sky high.”

His answer to this problem, of course, is the simplistic, short-sighted and dangerous solution that many others seem to endorse: Put everyone on birth control. He thus falls into the pit occupied by so many others – the fallacy that complex social problems have a “quick fix” that will make everything better, or at least greatly improve the situation.

Let us get one thing straight before proceeding: The goal of the developed nations is not to improve the standard of living of the people in developed nations. If it were, we’d see billions going toward building schools, investing in business, and other proven methods of helping the people of Africa and Asia flourish. The true objective of population control efforts is neatly summed up by the 1974 top-secret U.S. National Security Study Memorandum 200, revealingly subtitled “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests,” which said that:

The U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries. … Wherever a lessening of population pressures through reduced birth rates can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.
We must also be clear about another thing: The ultimate objective of the population controllers is not to ensure the widespread availability of contraception, but the worldwide availability of abortion.

NSSM-200 said that, “No country has reduced its population growth without resorting to abortion.Shortly after NSSM-200’s release, Malcolm Potts, former Medical Secretary of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), and perhaps the most knowledgeable person in the world about population matters, said that “No developed country has brought down its birth rate without a considerable recourse to abortion, and it appears unlikely that developing countries can ever hope to see any decline in their fertility without a massive resort to induced abortion, legal or illegal.”

Today, the most powerful population control groups in the world are quite frank about their desire to legalize abortion worldwide. For example, in its 1996 Charter on Sexual and Reproductive Rights, the IPPF claimed that “All women have the right to information, education and services necessary for the protection of reproductive health, safe motherhood and safe abortion and, which are accessible, affordable, acceptable and convenient to all users.” The 1994 Program of Action of the United Nations International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) demanded that all nations make abortion available and free to all women by the year 2015.

Perhaps this impending deadline is goading these groups into getting more and more extreme in their rhetoric; in 2008, one United Nations “expert group” ludicrously claimed that “Withholding legal abortion is a form of gender-based discrimination and violence against women.

Trampling the Rights, Laws and Traditions of Developing Nations

In their rush to legalize abortion worldwide, the population controllers have no trouble with trampling on the laws of pro-life nations. In its 1984 document The Human Right to Family Planning, the IPPF baldly stated that “Family Planning Associates and other nongovernmental associations should not use the absence of law or the existence of an unfavorable law as an excuse for inaction; action outside the law, or even in violation of it, is part of the process of stimulating change.” Other population control groups, including Marie Stopes International and Medecins Sans Frontieres, have admitted to committing illegal abortions in nations with pro-life laws.

When the only objective is to meet population control quotas, human rights are the first thing to go out the window. NSSM-200, which has never been officially repudiated as United States population policy, outlined the possibility of forced population control programs and the withholding of food as coercion:

… mandatory [population control] programs may be needed and that we should be considering these possibilities now. … On what basis should such food resources then be provided? Would food be considered an instrument of national power? Will we be forced to make choices as to whom we can reasonably assist, and if so, should population efforts be a criterion for such assistance?

Most of us are familiar with the hideous Chinese one-child and forced-abortion program, which “celebrated” its 30th anniversary this week. It is telling indeed that no population control organization has ever condemned or criticized this inhumane program. In fact, many of them have actually praised it. Nafis Sadik, former Executive Director of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), has said that

China has every reason to feel proud of and pleased with its remarkable achievements made in its family planning policy and control of its population growth over the past 10 years. Now the country could offer its experiences and special experts to help other countries.

This slavish dedication to suppressing the population has inevitably led to horrible abuses all over the world. Forced abortion and sterilization programs have been exposed in many countries, including Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, Czechoslovakia, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, the Philippines, Sweden, Switzerland, Tibet, Vietnam, and even the United States.

This trend seems to show no signs of slowing down. John Holdren, President Barack Obama’s “Science Czar,” wrote a 1977 book entitled, Ecoscience: Population, Resources and Development, with Paul and Anne Ehrlich [Paul Ehrlich is the author of the thoroughly debunked but still influential The Population Bomb]. In this book, Holdren and the Ehrlichs said that minority women and other undesirables should be forced to have abortions against their wills; that sterilizing agents should be put in the water supplies of the United States to help hold down the population; and that a “Planetary Police Force” should enforce population control measures.

This callous attitude is reflected in the public statements of countless population controllers around the world. After a number of Bangladeshi women died due to the side effects of injectable “contraceptives,” gynecologist Josas Kon said that “In order to have a good thing there is always a price to pay. If two or three women die — what’s the problem? The population will be reduced.”

This kind of uncaring attitude led Indian citizen Amartya Sen, winner of the 1998 Nobel Prize for economics, to remark that “Promoting a “family planning first” strategy can send a message to poor people: `Wish you weren’t here’.”

Having traveled to nearly forty poor nations in the Southern Hemisphere, this writer can confirm from personal experience that nothing contributes more to the image of the “Ugly American” than our attempts to compel the citizens of other nations to adopt our values ? particularly in the most sensitive area of deciding how many children they should have.

The Poor of the World Need Plows, Not Pills
What the poor people of the world need is not pills and condoms, but authentic economic development. Studies have demonstrated that, when the standard of living of poor people is raised, they tend to have fewer children. Urbanization, the education of women, increased consumerism, and job opportunities for women outside the home are among the factors that influence people to have smaller families.

But correcting such deficiencies is too difficult and complex for the population controllers. They prefer the simpler and more direct policy of “Find ‘em, bribe ‘em, neuter ‘em and forget ‘em,” which does nothing more than make large poor families into small poor families.

The world’s richest nations, led by the United States and the United Kingdom, have poured more than $75 billion into population control over the past two decades, wreaking havoc in the families and cultures of the developing world. Imagine how many tens of millions of people could have been raised out of poverty to a higher standard of living had all that money been invested in the future of these nations’ future rather than in eliminating their future, their children.

Brian Clowes speaks about NSSM200 in the film on eugenics called- Maafa21 (Clip Below)

Here is a segment with Dr. Clowes in the powerful 2.5 hour film- Maafa21