Chuck Norris Files Lawsuit Against Big Pharma: “They Nearly Killed My Wife”

American actor Chuck Norris has filed a massive lawsuit against eleven Big Pharma companies, claiming they are responsible for nearly killing his wife. 

“Unfortunately, litigation is the only course of action we can take to hold the drug companies accountable for threatening the lives of so many innocent people who undergo MRIs,” Gena Norris announced late last week.

Thefreethoughtproject.com reports: As Chuck Norris recently explained:

Gena and I have been in the news recently because of the gadolinium poisoning she received through her Magnetic Resonance Imaging, or MRI, “a diagnostic technique that uses magnetic fields and radio waves to produce a detailed image of the body’s soft tissue and bones.”

Chuck Norris files lawsuit against Big Pharma for nearly killing his wife with a common drug

We’re not overlooking the good MRIs can do. We’re speaking out against the dangers of gadolinium use in MRIs.

Gadolinium-based contrast agents, or GBCAs, are injected in about a third of 60 million MRIs performed annually – 30 million in the U.S. alone (that’s one in 10 Americans), including children.

Gadolinium is a heavy metal chemical agent that is injected to enhance the images of a MRI. It’s not naturally found in the human body. Its proponents say it is always expelled from the body, primarily through the kidneys. But studies have shown it can be retained in the brain, bones, skin and others parts of the body.


According to the lawsuit, Gena was poisoned by gadolinium and sustained Gadolinium Deposition Disease following routine MRIs. Gena suffered long-term health implications requiring multiple hospitalizations and almost $2 million dollars in out-of-pocket medical expenses.

As Business wire reports, Gena Norris has experienced cognitive impairment, body pain/burning, kidney damage, loss of energy/mobility, and difficulty breathing. Now, almost five-years post-gadolinium poisoning, she continues to require regular stem cell therapies and other treatments to heal her central nervous system.

“These companies continue to say that there is no link between gadolinium and adverse events, even though the evidence is overwhelming that this heavy metal stays in the body for years, rather than hours,” said Gena.

To treat her condition, the Norris family has had to seek alternative care outside of mainstream medicine. The treatment they sought to remove the gadolinium from her body, which is not yet approved by the FDA to treat gadolinium poisoning, is chelation therapy.

Chelation therapy is a chemical process in which a synthetic solution-EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid)-is injected into the bloodstream to remove heavy metals and/or minerals from the body. Chelation means “to grab” or “to bind.” When EDTA is injected into the veins, it “grabs” heavy metals and minerals such as lead, mercury, copper, iron, arsenic, aluminum, and calcium and removes them from the body. Except as a treatment for lead poisoning, chelation therapy is controversial and unapproved.

Gena and Chuck are represented by Brooks Cutter and Todd Walburg of Cutter Law in California who were present in September when the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) voted 13-1 (with one abstention) to add a warning about the risk of gadolinium retention after use of gadolinium-based contrast agents.

In October 2016, according to the firm, Cutter Law filed the first gadolinium deposition disease lawsuit against the maker of a gadolinium-based contrast agent, alleging patients were not properly warned about the risks associated with gadolinium retention. Since that time, they have filed several lawsuits for victims living across the country in both state and federal courts, Chuck and Gena included.

As CBS News reports, the Norris’ lawsuit acknowledges no official, publicly stated link between gadolinium and symptoms reported by people who believe the metal has affected their health. But that’s in part because blood and urine testing for gadolinium only became available recently and most doctors were not aware of any disease that was associated with gadolinium other than one that affects people with kidney problems, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit accuses the manufacturers of knowing about the risks associated with gadolinium but doing nothing about them.



Views: 23

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I like Chuck Norris, I like his movies, and his political views.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

ALERT ALERT

Clinton Donor And Tax Cheat Tied To Russia

“Do as we say, not as we do.”

That seems to be the slogan for Hillary Clinton and her political allies, and it’s especially apt in light of new information about one of Clinton’s largest campaign donors.

While the left is still trying to attack President Trump and his family over unproven business dealings and largely debunked connections to Russia, a new report indicates that it was Hillary Clinton’s team who were doing those exact things.

“Fox News has learned that one of the top donors to the ‘Hillary Victory Fund’ (HVF) in 2016 was a Los Angeles-based attorney who is alleged to have misused company funds to create his own $22 million real estate portfolio,” that outlet reported on Thursday.

“He has also been considered by California to be one of the state’s biggest tax cheats, and allegedly has ties to the (Russian) Kremlin,” Fox continued.

The man’s name is Edgar Sargsyan. His deep pockets greatly benefited Clinton’s campaign, with contributions of at least $250,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund in 2016.

He was also in charge of an elite fundraising dinner to benefit Clinton, where donors paid $100,000 per couple just to attend the ritzy event. But in true Clinton fashion, the money apparently went missing.

Sargsyan is now “being sued by his former company for allegedly diverting those funds to start his own real estate company,” according to Fox.

Now, people are asking hard questions about Clinton’s buddy Sargsyan, including whether his contributions were part of a pay-to-play scheme and if he had shady connections to foreign governments.

“Nobody gave to the Hillary Victory Fund out of the goodness of their heart or some generalized desire to help 33 random state parties,” pointed out attorney Dan Backer from the Committee to Defend the President.

“They did so to buy access and curry influence — something the Clintons have been selling for nearly three decades in and out of government,” he continued.

Trying to buy political influence is sadly common, especially when it comes to the Clintons. What is raising more red flags than normal, however, is the evidence that Sargsyan is no run-of-the-mill campaign donor.

“The really scary question is, what did this particular donor with this strange web of connections hope to buy for his quarter-million dollars?” Backer asked Fox News.

That web of connections is strange indeed.

The Committee to Defend the President is now alleging that SBK, a major Sargsyan-linked company “is an investment firm that is affiliated with United Arab Emirates president, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, and its international affiliate has business interests in Russia,” according to Fox.

“Among its dealings was a bid to finance $850 million for a major bridge project to connect Crimea with Russia,” the group claims.

“He worked for SBK, and SBK appears to have bid on some Crimean/Russian bridge project,” Backer said. “That’s usually an indicator of political favor and connections.”

It raises several chilling questions: Was Sargsyan paying a quarter million dollars to Clinton for political favors, and — more disturbingly — was that money actually from sources in Russia in order to smooth the way for its construction plans?

Nobody knows for sure. What is clear, however, is that there is a pattern of dirty money surrounding the Clintons, with the “Uranium One” and “Clinton Foundation” scandals just two of the most well-known examples.

“It reinforces how fast and loose the Clinton machine was when it came to ‘Hoovering up’ these megadonor checks, not just from questionable Hollywood and Wall Street elites but potentially from foreign influence peddlers using who knows what money,” Backer told Fox News.

“It reinforces the need to take a long hard look at not just the unlawful money laundering process, but the way in which they were solicited as well,” he continued. “The Clintons have never shown a great deal of concern for whomever it was cutting the checks — whether it’s foreign influence peddlers or Hollywood smut peddlers like Harvey Weinstein.”

If those claims are even partially true, then America dodged a bullet in November of 2016 — and it’s worth keeping the pile of foreign-connected Clinton scandals in mind the next time the left tries desperately to tie Donald Trump to Russia. Perhaps they should look in the mirror.

SLAVEHOLDER??

Washington Post Compares
Jeff Sessions To Slaveholder’

The Washington Post compared Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “slaveholders” after he quoted the Bible on Thursday while discussing his department’s policy of prosecuting all illegal immigrants who cross the border.

Sessions made the statement during a speech to law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

WaPo ran a story entitled “Sessions cites Bible passage used to defend slavery in defense of separating immigrant families” by general assignment editor Keith McMillan and religion reporter Julie Zauzmer on Friday.

Rather than detailing the statistics Sessions cited in the speech that explain the immigration policy, the story quoted John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania.

“This is the same argument that Southern slaveholders and the advocates of a Southern way of life made,” Fea said.

Sessions spent much of the speech discussing the numbers behind current immigration policy, including separating families at the Southwest border.

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes,” Sessions said.

“Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves. Consistent and fair application of the law is in itself a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak and protects the lawful.”

“The previous administration wouldn’t prosecute aliens if they came with children,” Sessions said.

“It was de-facto open borders if you came with children. The results were unsurprising. More and more illegal aliens started showing up at the border with children.”

Sessions laid out the numbers in the speech.

“In 2013, fewer than 15,000 family units were apprehended crossing our border illegally between ports of entry in dangerous areas of the country,” he said.

“Five years later, it was more than 75,000, a five-fold increase in five years. It didn’t even have to be their child that was brought, it could be anyone. You can imagine that this created a lot of danger.”

The U.S. has the “opportunity” to fix its broken immigration system now, Sessions said.

“I believe that’s it’s moral, right, just and decent that we have a lawful system of immigration,” he said. “The American people have been asking for it.”

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service