Author Topic: Co-Creator of Birth Control Pill Laments Resulting Demographic Horror Scenario  (Read 27233 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
The Eugenicists are winning. The Dissappearing Caucasian....

Carl Djerassi - emeritus professor of chemistry at Stanford University

Source: Counting Down, The New Scientist, October 2, 1999

Co-Creator of the Pill Laments Resulting Demographic "Horror Scenario"

By Kathleen Gilbert

VIENNA, January 8, 2009 ( - An Austrian chemist who helped spearhead the creation of the earliest contraceptive pill has expressed dismay at the severance of sexuality and reproduction made possible by widespread use of the pill, and has warned against the impending demographic disaster from plummeting birth rates.

Carl Djerassi wrote of his concern in a commentary appearing in the December issue of Austria's Der Standard, where he described couples who regularly contracept as "wanting to enjoy their schnitzels while leaving the rest of the world to get on with it."

Djerassi, who is a chemist, novelist, and playwright, is best known for helping create the synthetic hormone progestin norethindrone in 1951, together with Mexican Luis E. Miramontes and Hungarian George Rosenkranz.  The far more potent synthetic hormone was soon used for contraceptive purposes as it remains effective when taken orally, unlike natural female hormones.

At the time, Djerassi had said that "not in our wildest dreams" had he expected the chemical to be used for contraception.  Now, he writes, "My contribution is to help these people wake up," referring to Austrian couples who freely contracept.

Lamenting that there is now "no connection at all between sexuality and reproduction," Djerassi said, "This divide in Catholic Austria, a country which has on average 1.4 children per family, is now complete.  Most Austrians enjoy sexual intercourse without thereby wanting or begetting a child."

Djerassi explained that Austria, which is now home to more seniors over 65 than children under 15, would soon enter "an impossible situation" as the lopsided population would result in a working class too small to support the needs of elderly pensioners. 

Therefore, he urged, Austrians would have to quickly adopt an immigration policy designed to counteract the effects of widespread contraception lest the population commit "national suicide."

(To view the original article in German, go to:

Source: for the years 1993 - 1997:Francis Fukuyama, The Great Disruption
The graph is based on data from and from

Original Source: Stats Canada Therapeutic Abortions 1995 ...
Table at Canadian Abortion Statistics (that link no longer functions, the page has not been archived)

I never blamed the pill for the fall in family size
It's not about birth control; people make choices for personal and economic reasons

The Guardian, Tuesday 27 January 2009
Article history
Your article on my alleged thoughts about the pill began with the sentence: "Roman Catholic leaders have pounced on a 'confession' by one of the inventors of the birth control pill who has said the contraceptive he helped create was responsible for a 'demographic catastrophe'" (Church grabs chance to attack birth control, 7 January).

Let me pounce back on this statement, which in the meantime has escalated throughout the Catholic press in the US, Italy and elsewhere under such headlines as "Pill inventor slams pill" and "Co-inventor of birth control pill now calls it a catastrophe".

This calumny was prompted by a long article I published in the Austrian newspaper Der Standard on 13 December, where I decried the dramatic shift to the right in Catholic Austria's recent election and its startlingly xenophobic overtones. Given that this happened on the 70th anniversary of the Anschluss, I as a former refugee from Austria - a country that has recently placed my face on a postage stamp - felt obliged to speak out.

Contraception, birth control, abortion, or the pill were nowhere mentioned in my article. I accused the disturbingly large xenophobic segment of Austrian voters (notably young ones) of assuming that their small country was not situated in the middle of Europe but rather on an island where God permits them to live independently to enjoy their schnitzels.

I warned against an impending demographic catastrophe. Without immigration, a country requires 2.1 children per family to maintain its population level; so those xenophobic Austrians would have to have at least three children (which I considered totally unlikely) in order to raise the small size of most of their compatriots' families to a national average of 2.1.

I drew attention to Bulgaria, a country to which I fled in 1938 from Nazi Austria, and which possesses roughly the same current population, age distribution and average family size (1.4 children) as Austria. Nobody these days wants to emigrate to Bulgaria, in contrast to Austria or other western European countries. As a result, demographic estimates predict a 35% drop in Bulgaria's current population by 2050.

I also indicated that Germany's family size (1.3 children) requires an annual immigration of 200,000 just to maintain the current population. Consequently, I emphasised the need in Austria for continuing immigration.

To assume that I attributed the decline in Austria's family size (matched by all-Catholic Italy and Spain) to the pill is absurd. People don't have smaller families because of the availability of birth control, but for personal, economic, cultural and other reasons, of which the changes in the status and lifestyles of women during the last 50 years is the most important.

Japan has an even worse demographic problem than western Europe, yet the pill was only legalised there in 1999 and is still not used widely.

One only needs to read my 2001 memoir, This Man's Pill: Reflections on the 50th Anniversary of the Pill, to find my personal views on contraception, the pill, and the de facto separation of sex and reproduction - which sooner or later the Catholic church must face realistically and humanely.

• Carl Djerassi is an author and playwright and is emeritus professor of chemistry at Stanford University. His most recent book (2008) is Sex in an Age of Technological Reproduction
The Report, February 3, 2003, p. 51
The unfolding extinction of western Europeans shows the fallibility of the infallible
All through our lives, from our distant youth onward, people of our generation were repeatedly warned of a dire circumstance threatening the world. It was called "the population explosion," and the warnings came from unimpeachable sources—earth scientists, demographers, and economists, men whose authority one dared not challenge. Their message was always the same.

By the 1980s, or at the latest some time in the 21st century, they predicted, vital resources would run out, massive starvation beset the world and people perish by the millions. The cause of this doom was that the human race was having far too many children. Organizations such as Planned Parenthood, therefore, deployed their forces about the globe, wildly wielding contraceptives and frantically opening abortion mills in a desperate effort to save humanity.

Many took their message to heart. Single men in North America voluntarily opted to be vasectomized, ostensibly to escape personal responsibility for the coming disaster. Parents would announce the advent of unplanned children with undisguised shame. "We may have one, possibly two, but certainly no more," newlyweds would typically vow, convinced that any more hungry young mouths would constitute wanton excess.

But now, it turns out, all this was balderdash. The experts, we are told, were dead wrong, and the problem is the precise reverse. There's a critical threat all right, but it stems from too few babies, not too many, and the process is rapidly reaching a point of no return.

In Europe, where birth rates are far below replacement levels, the Caucasian race may soon become a beleaguered minority or vanish entirely. Already, workforces cannot be maintained, economies are imperiled, and the most massive migration since the fall of the Roman Empire is replacing the missing Caucasians with Middle-Eastern workers. Since these continue having numerous children, Europe's democracies in the not-very-distant future will yield to Muslim autocracies and her great cathedrals become mosques. Europeans prefer not to talk about this. A French teacher was actually prosecuted for asking her students to calculate the date when France would have a Muslim majority. The newspapers covered the story—but did not reveal their conclusions.

Canada, with a birth rate 15% to 20% below replacement level,[1] also must maintain heavy immigration. U.S. figures are much the same, although complicated by an avalanche of Latino "illegals." Illegal or no, however, they are necessary to the U.S. economy.

Four recent books on the subject are reviewed in the current issue of Touchstone magazine by Leon ]. Podles, one of the magazine's senior editors.* The figures he quotes are more startling than ever. To maintain zero-population growth, women of childbearing age must have an average of 2.1 children, but Spain and Italy—lowest in Europe—are now down to 1.2. In Canada, the province of Quebec is a prime contender for the world's lowest birth rate, but the city of Bologna in Italy, at 0.8, probably still retains that title. And there are other ominous trends. In Vienna, Austria, for example, half the population is single.

The inevitable effects are indeed striking. As our population ages, the proportion of seniors expands while the proportion of people who must support them diminishes. Newcomers brought in to do this job—replacing, in effect, our own non-existent children—will soon constitute a majority. But these replacements may not remain all that keen about providing massive tax subsidies for elderly Caucasians.

Meanwhile, our social planners are beginning to ask themselves why people, especially women, do not want to have children. Here are a few possible explanations:

Because for 50 years we have employed every possible instrument of social propaganda to persuade women to embrace careers, which usually limit them to one child or none.
Because our entire social apparatus emphasizes material well being as "success," and raising children erodes material well being.
Because hare-brained "anti-spanking zealots work to prohibit effective discipline of children, which makes raising them extraordinarily difficult.
Because teachers are encouraged to undermine parental authority in sex-education courses.
Because divorce has been de-stigmatized and made into a common occurrence easily acquired, thereby depriving the family of the social support it has received in every previous era.
Because wage levels and job opportunities no longer favour heads of families.
Because State funding continues to support anti-birth lobby groups, although their efforts are socially detrimental and destructive.

Most serious of all is the pervasive anti-Christian bias of most of the media and at every government level. The greatest incentive for having children comes from the belief that they constitute a precious gift from God. No God means no children, which is why birth rates follow church-attendance rates downward. But failure to recognize God also entails divine judgment, as surely as effect follows cause. In this century, we may discover to our sorrow just what that means.

*A Question of Numbers, by Michael S. Teitelbaum and Jay Winter; Hill & Wang, New York. The Death of the West, by Patrick J. Buchanan; St. Martin's Press, New York. World Population Prospects, United Nations Publications, New York. The New Christendom: the Coming Global Christianity, by Philip Jenkins; Oxford University Press, New York.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341

Marie Stopes
Royal Mail Honors Eugenicist & Nazi Sympathizer
Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet
Friday, September 12, 2008

Royal Mail is set to honor Marie Stopes, a feminist who opened the first birth control clinic in Britain in 1921 as well as being Nazi sympathizer and a eugenicist who advocated that non-whites and the poor be sterilized, by adopting her image for a new set of stamps.

Carl Djerassi is a sicko ....

Carl Djerassi
Broadcast Monday 20 November 2000 
with Norman Swan

Professor Carl Djerassi was one of the scientists who invented the Pill. He is also an accomplished author and playwright. Professor Djerassi talks with Norman Swan about his work.

Norman Swan: Welcome to a Health Report on sex. Hello from me, Norman Swan.

One of the huge social and biological changes wrought by the invention of the oral contraceptive, the Pill, is that once and for all it divided sex from the act of fertilisation, of conceiving a baby.

And one of the scientists responsible for this earthquake in human behaviour was Carl Djerassi, Professor of Chemistry at Stanford University, whose work on reproductive hormones allowed the Pill to be developed.

And now, about 50 years later, Carl Djerassi thinks there’s a good argument to be made that men’s reproductive abilities are becoming progressively redundant, mainly because the technology’s available to replace blokes.

But in order to advance his argument, Carl Djerassi has resorted to what has become his second career as a novelist and playwright. He has best sellers to his name, often with a theme close to the moral, ethical and biological dilemmas created by researchers themselves. He has a play which explores the death of sex for reproduction in the 21st century.

I had a conversation with Carl Djerassi recently in the United States, where we started from the usual point I suppose, namely that there can’t be many chemists who are successful writers.

Carl Djerassi: Primo Levi was a famous chemist who certainly did a lot of writing but I think he was primarily a writer who also happened to be a chemist. He was not a great chemist; I think I’m a very much better chemist, although I think he was a better writer.

Norman Swan: You talk about the genre, and you describe the genre as science in fiction. What are you trying to achieve?

Carl Djerassi: What I’m trying to do is to use fiction as really a method of smuggling serious accurate scientific ideas, concepts, behavioural aspects, even facts, into a public’s mind that is either ascientific or anti-scientific or not interested in science, or not aware of the issues. Everyone likes to hear a story. And then in fact after they’ve heard the story, and hopefully it was an interesting one that kept their attention, they actually learned something. And in the process of course of my trying to write this, to do that, which is not easy to do, I have learned something in the process too.

Norman Swan: What have you learned?

Carl Djerassi: I have learned how we scientists, who come from a very tribal culture, know very little about how we actually behave. We do not analyse our own behaviour, we analyse the world ourselves. We are fantastic analysts, that’s really what we are, you know, every chemist really in a way is an analytical chemist even though we call ourselves other things. We analyse the world around us, in intimate detail. The only thing we don’t seem to analyse is our own behaviour.

Norman Swan: One of the things that pervades any area is stereotypes, and scientists, doctors, medical researchers, they have the stereotype, whether it’s uncaring, technological, ruthless or even conversely, warm-hearted and generous. But presumably those stereotypes just simply don’t apply; there’s as much diversity amongst researchers as the general community.

Carl Djerassi: Absolutely. When you talk about the warm, good-hearted one, that’s usually the sweet, romantic image of a physician. It hardly ever is of the scientist. I’m a chemist, I wish some people would talk about warm-hearted chemists; they don’t. We are usually Frankensteins, Strangeloves or nerds. And frankly I draw a distinction between physician and scientist. Let me tell you, medicine sometimes is a science; much of the time it’s an art and sometimes even just mumbo-jumbo.

Norman Swan: And you’re not talking about stereotypes, of course. If we just take some examples of your writing. I mean the one I know best is ‘Cantor’s Dilemma’ which is this story of fraud. That must have been quite uncomfortable for your fellow scientists to read.

Carl Djerassi: ‘Cantor’s Dilemma’ is an interesting case because it’s become a text document in many American Universities, in courses where they teach ethics and research, sociology and science and so on. It’s too black and white to call it a story of fraud. It’s the story of something grey, and I believe it’s the grey issues that are much more important. Here is a superstar Professor of the warm kind, ambitious but kind, whose students adore him. And when he has this fantastic idea, you know it’s like an Epiphany you say, ‘My God, this has to be correct, this is too beautiful’, and you know, sometimes it’s true, but you should never fall in love with your idea, that’s one of the most dangerous things in science. So he thinks of an experiment and he goes to his favourite student, and he says, ‘Jerry, drop what you’re doing. Here’s the experiment, you’ve got to do it, you’re the best one, and this experiment has got to work and it’s got to be finished in three months.’ And while the student goes and he does experiment, and he delivers the goods within three months, and the Professor is delirious, and they write up a paper and then it creates a sensation the paper. And eventually they win the Nobel Prize. Of course people have to confirm that, and there his colleague as well as competitor at another institution at Harvard, tries to do so. Here I try to make a very important point: science is both the most collegial of all intellectual enterprise and at the same time the most brutally competitive one. There are very few things where you have these two extremes, where the brutal competition comes from your colleagues, and vice versa. Now that is very important and what drives it is ambition, and ambition and more ambition. And ambition is both the nourishment that makes all these things possible, and the poison at the same time. Now that mixture is a very potent thing and the balance between the very tricky and usually you don’t plan it that way, and name recognition counts for everything and is name recognition by your colleagues and not at all by the public and therefore most of as scientists couldn’t care less about the public, get no Brownie points for communicating with them or talking to people like you on the radio, because you can do nothing for me as a scientist. So that was the situation, that’s why they couldn’t repeat it, they couldn’t repeat the experiment. But in fact it was probably just you didn’t worry in the beginning because sometimes you can’t do this, you don’t have all the details, but after a while he distrusts his student, and that of course is the worst thing in science, because everything depends on trust. Ours is a totally vertical enterprise, we’re dependent on the results of people below us, behind us, before us or on each side, and if you can’t trust them you can’t do any research. So that was very serious and if you can’t trust your favourite collaborator, that’s the worst thing.

And yet he doesn’t want to admit that he doesn’t trust him because then it would mean that his theory is false, so instead he pretends that this guy is going to do another experiment, he himself the Professor, does it himself, a different type, which in fact confirms his hypothesis, so his hypothesis is correct. But now lo and behold he gets a Nobel prize for it, but the thing that was published was the inappropriate experiment or the incomplete one. So the student also gets a Nobel prize; he just faces the situation what do we put up in Stockholm? I don’t want to give the story away because it’s very realistic and it’s very grey, and it is not obvious what the answer is. And in fact it shouldn’t be. And I’m a great believer in all my fiction and now in my plays, not to give the answer.

Norman Swan: In one of your most recent works, ‘The Immaculate Misconception’, you kind of return to base because a lot of your work in the past has been on reproductive biology of one kind or another in terms of work on the oral contraceptive and reproductive steroids. Just again, briefly tell us the plot here, and what do you think it tells us about the future?

Carl Djerassi: ‘The Immaculate Misconception’ is my first play which has now been performed in a number of theatres. I’m interested in bringing these issues to the public also on the stage rather than just through reading, for people who are not even going to read, but they’re willing to go to the stage. But what I really tried to do is talk about what I consider the issue of the next millennium, and that is the impending separation of sex and reproduction.

 Sex of course still continues to be done in the usual way and that’s for reasons that we always do: love, lust, pleasure. But reproduction separately, fertilisation, under the microscope, so to speak, now this separation of sex and reproduction which of course was not possible before, so therefore implicit in every sexual act was the fact that you might get pregnant, and that of course is you might say the Catholic dictum: you should not have sex for fun, you should have sex with at least the possibility, you can do it for fun but only with all the possibility of reproduction.

Well that stopped, that really stopped in a way you could say in 1960, with the introduction of oral contraceptives and IUDs, because these are the two methods of contraception that separated sex from contraception. So therefore anyone who was on the Pill, that’s a decision you might make on the 1st January and the first time you might have sex is 5th March, so therefore you clearly made a decision the 1st January, the woman in this case, you know the couple if you wish, that ‘I do not want to have children, but I want to be ready for sexual intercourse.’ Now that was the beginning of that separation, but the real next step was –

Norman Swan: Steptoe.

Carl Djerassi: Steptoe and Edwards, in other words, the introduction of in vitro fertilisation, and that at least made possible the ex utero fertilisation that is, you remove an egg from the woman, fertiliser it in the usual way, that is, you expose it to millions of sperm as if the sperm were ejaculated, of course you put it in the Petrie dish, then after fertilisation a couple of days later, you put the fertilised egg, the embryo now, back into the woman and she has a normal pregnancy, hopefully.

Norman Swan: It’s a long way from IVF though to saying that the world is going to move towards, that normal fertilisation is going to be outside the body.

Carl Djerassi: Ah, but of course that’s where the next invention comes out.

For me I think the most loaded one ethically, and that is ICSI, intracytoplasmic sperm injection, which is an invention only published in 1992, maybe 1991, in Belgium, which is a direct injection of a single sperm into an egg, again, under the microscope.

Now you can do it with only one single sperm. That has the normal implications and these are in fact illustrated in my play, and some of the implications are that you could now make possible post menopausal pregnancies, predetermination of sex, aspiration of sperm of a dead man, and then fertilising months or years later an egg. I mean there are all kinds of implications. And the most important of them all is that if you now have the embryo outside the body and only then put it back in the woman, you can genetically analyse it before you put it back. So there now is a moment where you can practice eugenics. Now this is personal eugenics, we’re not talking about the master race or that sort of thing, we’re not talking about test-tube babies, but we’re talking about a form of genetic analysis which is possible to eliminate let’s say, certain diseases.

Norman Swan: But what is it about the intracytoplasmic sperm injection that’s different from just standard IVF, that you think is such a leap, because you could always, since IVF has been perfected, you could always stick an egg, even somebody who donated their egg before they were menopausal, and fertilise it. What’s the difference from being able to inject the sperm?

Carl Djerassi: Well to give you just one example, I wish I’d had the scene from my play to actually show it, because that’s of course exactly the question, that a man asks a woman, and the woman says, ‘Ah ha, but you see we knew how to freeze eggs but we didn’t really know how to fertiliser these thawed eggs. With ICSI you inject it directly into the egg, it makes no difference what happens to the outside and so on, but the fundamental point, you make a good question, is what is different. This was developed for male infertility. You can take men who are absolutely infertile; they have no mature sperm, they have no vas deferens which is the duct that leads sperm to the urethra. Such men of course are 100% infertile, and yet you can use their sperm, their immature sperm, and create babies and one has done that.

So now it’s possible to inherit the uninheritable. This is unbelievable. Inherit the uninheritable. Because you cannot inherit congenital infertility, you know you’re infertile therefore you can’t have any offspring. Suddenly you can do that. Does that imply that your offspring is now also infertile and the implication mostly that it is, and the answer, as it is in my play is, Well, like father, like son. But the son used ICSI as well, so you get now a series of ICSI generations. Is there anything wrong with this? There may not be, but there may be.

We have now the first ICSI child born in 1991, nine-and-a-half years old, less than ten years old. By now there are over 10,000 ICSI babies already. By the time you really will have answers to the questions I’m saying, which is another 20 years, because you have to wait until these things are adults, and you find all the things, you have 100,000 ICSI babies and more than that. That genie is out of the bottle.

Now of course it only happens in affluent countries, probably only the affluent people. And in some countries like the United States, we have hardly any government restrictions to this but it’s not covered by insurance. So it’s the affluent people in the affluent places that can do this, and you can then also by doing this embryo selection, apply a form of eugenics, which the poor people cannot afford. Now you have another increasing gulf between the rich and the poor, which is now at the micro personal eugenic level.

At the same time you are skipping evolutionary barriers: presumably the reason why these people are infertile you might say, you can say God did it, Nature does it, you know, whatever you want to call it, but clearly there are evolutionary selection reasons for this. We overcome all these now. That was not possible before, because you want to remember in vitro fertilisation, the Steptoe Edwards one, which was a very important step, you need that fertile sperm, you could not do it with infertile sperm. You of course needed a fertile egg. The only thing that they tried to cure is women couldn’t get that egg down to where they have to do it, but now with ICSI and the Steptoe Edwards in vitro fertilisation, you’re talking about a different proposition. You’re talking about another quantum jump.

Norman Swan: What’s the dramatic story that you tell in the play?

Carl Djerassi: It’s actually a good story, if I may say so. In my play I have a woman make the invention, ICSI, because I’m a great believer in this; I’ve done this in my fiction, and women have often asked me ‘Why did you men work on the female Pill, why didn’t you work on a male Pill?’ A very good question. So at least in my fiction I have a woman do it in my last novel which deals with treatment for male impotence, like Viagra, I have a woman discover this rather than a man. So in this case I have a woman discover ICSI, and she is a woman who knows her biological clock is ticking loudly, she has no children, she’s in her late 30s, and she invented ICSI and she’s ready to do the first ICSI experiment, and decides to experiment on herself, with her own egg.

But she needs some sperm and she’s the sort of person who cannot go to an anonymous sperm bank, and she falls in love with an infertile man in a very intense but very short way and she decides to ‘steal’ the sperm by simply keeping the condom, they use a condom. He asks ‘What the hell do we need a condom for, I’m infertile.’ She says, safe sex, you know, we gotta have it. So she does it, she preserves it, in a thermos, runs to the bathroom and puts it in a thermos and there’s a funny scene in the play, and then in fact tries the first ICSI experiment on herself, becomes pregnant and eventually has a child.

She does not inform him, because she doesn’t want to burden him, he’s married, etc. etc. The ethical question has she stolen something, in other words he is infertile, he’s always thrown his seed away so to speak, he was useless. She takes his garbage.

So she uses his junk on her egg with her invention. All that is perfectly OK. She hasn’t stolen anything, or has she? Because of course she creates new life, and that new life you could not have created without a man’s junk. And at that point of course, you really get into the ethic, and that is a fundamental ethic for me, the preoccupation by people to become parents, who can’t usually become parents, and usually are obsessed by realising parenthood without paying very much attention to the product of that, namely the child.

And there may be all kinds of things that then will apply to the child that will be produced in a child, that would not be produced ordinarily, but because of these interventions. And the final real argument, and it’s ironic perhaps for me who let’s say was involved in an invention that made possible to have sex without life and now

I write about creating life without sex, is that I think in the future gradually contraception will be unnecessary because if everything I described will, it will be possible that it will be practised more widely.

Norman Swan: We’ll have a world populated by infertile people?

Carl Djerassi: No, not so much that, but everyone would then – see, this can of course also be used by fertile people. A young man stores his sperm, a woman stores her young eggs, going for of course super ovulation, then you can get sterilised. There’s no reason to practice contraception because you have them in the bank. Whenever you want to have a child, you go to the bank, you check out your material, you now have several embryos, you pick the best embryo, this of course is loaded with ethical questions, and you create a child that you really want.

Norman Swan: How do you feel being somebody who helped to create the revolution that really created the need for Steptoe and IVF? Because one argument is that with oral contraception women were more able to have a career, delay pregnancy, and there was no doubt that in your late 30s you’re far less fertile than you were; your eggs aren’t in terribly good shape and your husband’s more likely to be sub-fertile, and therefore the need for that, you could sheet a lot of the blame back to people like you.

Carl Djerassi: Well you could, but it’s too black and white. You asked a grey question and you’re not going to get a black and white answer to a grey question. You can only get a grey answer. And I think it’s shades of grey. And it depends how you want to interpret it, because of course, that was not the reason why the Pill was developed. And in fact what I just described, the other, if you want to call it horror scenario, is not why ICSI was developed. The interesting part is that scientists carry out in this case technological inventions or applications of their work, with a very specific aim in mind, without realising particularly in reproductive biology, the other application in which it can be used.

 For instance there’s no question that at the time that the work with the Pill was done, remember we synthesised the Pill in October 1951. This will be the 50th anniversary next year. It was first introduced in medicine in 1960. It was as a contraceptive. Well we didn’t think this was going to cause the sexual revolution.

 Well in fact, did it cause that? It’s blamed or credited it caused this. I’m not quite sure, that experiment can never be repeated. Remember the 1960s were not just the introduction of the Pill, and the two countries where it was most widely used at the time interestingly enough, was first the United States and then Australia.

But at the same time those were the years of the drug culture, those were the years of the rock ‘n’ roll music, and there’s no question if you’d had no Pill whatsoever, you would have still had a sexual revolution in the context in which people look at it, with a lot more misery.

There would have been a lot of illegal abortions, there would have been a lot of unwanted pregnancies, but there’s no question in my mind that it would have happened in one way or another anyway; perhaps not exactly the same way. And I think the Pill was a contributing factor in the same way the Pill was a contributing factor to what you’ve just mentioned. But again what you mentioned is you blame ‘the Pill’ on the fact that more and more women moved not only into work, but into difficult and complicated work, into professions from which they were kept out, and where they therefore postponed child bearing until as you correctly state, you reach middle, late 30s when you are getting frequently sub-fertile and so on.

But that may have happened anyway. For cultural reasons women were discriminated. The women’s movement, you’re not going to credit the entire women’s movement to the Pill, it would be nice if you could do so, but it would be inappropriate. So all these things happened, so the Pill facilitated certain things, it stimulated certain things, it catalysed certain things, it also inhibited certain things. I can tell you right now that there are some negative things, the fact of the matter that men have paid less and less attention to contraception, simply said it was another thing that women can now do.

Were it not for AIDS, not that I’m advertising AIDS, but you know, condom use would have kept on going down, and that was certainly just reversed at that time, but you don’t find any pharmaceutical company really working on male contraceptives these days. So that is not being done.

Norman Swan: Just coming back to where we started, and finally, do you think that using drama, using fiction, can actually ever truly replicate the actual ethical dilemma, since you have to stretch the truth? You have to create a situation which is slightly bizarre and unusual to just create that edge. It’s got to be larger than life.

Carl Djerassi: Well you know yes and no. The fact of course is that you could try and, let’s talk about plays because I’m particularly interested in using drama, the stage, to present the scientific things. You could use it just as a form of interesting lecture, but people are not going to go to that sort of theatre, or if they do, that’s it –

Norman Swan: It’s showbiz, you’ve just got to accept it as.

Carl Djerassi: Yes but I really would like to make it also exciting, and there’s nothing wrong. You do that too, you don’t have a radio program on some very dull subject, you pick something where you think there’s a certain interesting twist, even though frequently you talk about dull subjects, dull not in an intellectual sense.

Norman Swan: You don’t listen to my program.

Carl Djerassi: Yes, that’s also true. But in that context I would say if you want to say I partly plead guilty, I would say nolo contendere; one has to dramatise it, but this is to me the important thing in my science and fiction; if you read my novels you would see that. I am not trying to exaggerate, I’m trying to, I don’t just want them used for didactic purposes, I’ve got to also amuse and entertain. People have to be willing to turn the pages and keep on reading, people have got to be willing in a theatre to pay attention and to not walk out, and then of course hold their attention. But that is part of a good story and I think one doesn’t have to be ashamed for that or apologise for it.

Norman Swan: Carl Djerassi, thank you very much.

Carl Djerassi: You’re welcome, thanks.

Norman Swan: The amazing Carl Djerassi, who’s Professor of Chemistry at Stanford University. His play is called “An Immaculate Misconception” and the book mentioned is called “Cantor’s Dilemma”, published by Penguin. We’ve been told that it’s out of print.

Dr. Carl Djerassi
Professor of Chemistry,
Stanford University,
Stanford CA 94305-5080
California, U.S.A.

An Immaculate Misconception
Author: Carl Djerassi
Publisher: Imperial College Press, London, ISBN 1-86094-248-2
Cantor's Dilemma
Author: Carl Djerassi
Publisher: Penguin
This book is out of print
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
The next event in this year's series features:
Carl Djerassi - Father of the birth control pill

Wednesday, January 14, 2009, 7:30 PM, Cubberley
Auditorium, Stanford Campus. Free and open to the public.

Carl Djerassi was born in Austria in 1923 to Jewish parents.  He and his mother escaped the  Nazis and arrived - penniless - in the U.S. in  1938 when he was 16 years old.  By the end of his career as a Stanford Professor of Chemistry, he  was known as the Father of the Birth Control  Pill, inventor of novel forms of insect control,  developer of antihistamines, biomedical  entrepreneur, and internationally renowned  author. 

Djerassi was the first recipient of the  Wolf Prize in Chemistry and one of very few  people to have received both a National Medal of Technology and a National Medal of Science (by  President Nixon in spite of being on Nixon's  "enemies list" at the time).  Among his many  other awards are the Priestly Prize (the American  Chemical Society's highest honor) and 20 honorary  doctorates from universities around the  world.  He is a member of the National Inventors Hall of Fame, and is pictured on an Austrian postage stamp.

For the past 22 years, Djerassi has turned to  writing fiction, especially "science-in-fiction,"  showing the human side of scientists and the  personal conflicts they face in their quest for  knowledge, recognition, and financial rewards.  His plays, novels and poems have been published  and performed in 15 languages throughout the world.

Join us to learn about the amazing journey of  this scientist-turned-author's life, reflections,  and accomplishments.  His esteemed colleague  Stanford Chemistry Professor Paul Wender will  begin the evening with a brief description of  Djerassi's contributions and their impacts on society.  This talk will be followed by an  in-depth interview with Professor Djerassi about  his own reflections on life and his  works.  Audience Q&A will follow.  This is your  chance to engage with one of the most consequential thinkers of our time.

This Series is sponsored by Stanford's Continuing
Studies, Historical Society, Office of Public
Affairs, School of Medicine, and Hoover Institution
For more information please visit
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
May 11, 1992
Carl Djerassi Receives 1992 Priestley Award:
Prolific Scientist publishes Autobiography Depicting Journey into Metaphysical Realm
So I felt compelled to expedite this review of The Pill, Pygmy Chimps, and Degas’ Horse. ~
This autobiography, sprinkled throughout with many photographs, ranging from family pictures to one in which Djerassi and King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden inspect  two cockroaches, chronicles his colorful entrepreneurial career as “mother” of  the birth control pill, developer of antihistamines and topical corticosteroids, founder
of biomedical companies, teacher, novelist, and poet. In between, he has punctuated his life with three marriages, two children, collecting art, purchasing prime California coastal property, trekking in the Himalayas, and surviving a bout with colon cancer-in short, enough adventures for several lifetimes.
The Early Years
Djerassi is best known to the public for his synthesis and development of the fmt oral contraceptive-commonly known as The Pill. This milestone was reached through his intense interest in steroids.

Born to a Bulgarian father and an Austrian mother in Vienna in 1923, he lived for awhile in Bulgaria after Hitler’s annexation of Austria, attending the American school in Sofia where he learned English.

In 1939, he emigrated to the US with his mother. Both his parents were physicians and Carl initially expected to follow in their footsteps.

In a recent interview in the San Francisco Chronicle, ~ Djerassi, now 68, was labeled a “feminist.” And well he might be.

He now teaches only two courses at Stanford for undergraduates, one of them under two titles-’’Femninist Perspectives on Birth Control” and “Gender-Specific Perspectives on Birth Control.” The course is
offered through the feminist studies program and the human biology program. His wife, Diane Wood Middlebrook, whose biography of the poet Anne Sexton we recently discussed, for five years headed
the feminist studies program at Stanford
, in addition to serving as professor of English.
“The Pill is a four-letter word,” Djerassi  told the Chronicle. “But it’s both a pejorative word and complimentary. In the beginning an explosion of litigation went on for 10 years while women concerned about side effects demanded, ‘Why do you use us as guinea pigs?’ But then when women saw that it empowered them, it was a quantum jump-from diaphragms and condoms to the Pill-with nothing at all in between.”

The Lederberg Connection

In 1958, Lederberg, now president emeritus of Rockefeller University, became chairman of Stanford University’s genetics department.

That same year, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine, along with George W. Beadle and Edward L. Tatum, for his work in genetics. The paths of Djerassi and Lederberg converged in the arena of artificial intelligence, in which Lederberg is still engaged as director of a small research team at Rockefeller. As Djerassi recounts in his autobiography:

“We were well advanced in our mass spectrometry research when, one day in the mid- 1960s, Joshua Lederberg approached me with a proposal for collaboration. His interest in exobiology (evidence for life in outer space) had prompted him to establish an instrumentation facility in the genetics department of Stanford’s school of medicine, in preparation for an eventual unmanned mission to Mars.

Like other investigators in the field, he felt that placing a rugged mass spectrometer with a remotecontrol sampling device on the space vehicle might be the most effective method for screening moleades indicative of organic life, such as amino acids, the building blocks for proteins, and porphyrins, which are substances related to chlorophyll.

Would I join him and Edward Feigenbrmm, a professor in the computer science department and one of the pioneers of artificial intelligence, in determining whether AI could be used to derive chemical structures
from a single mass spectrum sent back from outer space by telemetry?

Over a dozen years, our three research groups collaborated to lay some of the cornerstones for the imposing edifice that computer-aided knowledge engineering now represents in chemistry.

As Lederberg put it in an interview, ‘We are trying to teach a computer how Djerassi thinks about mass spectrometry.’“


In 1976, following his second divorce— described as a “watershed event”z (p. 282>
Djerassi turned from being a serious art collector to being an art patron.

His purchase, in the mid- 1960s, of 1,200 acres of coastal range about a half-hour’s drive from the  Stanford campus made art ideal site for an artist’s colony, with its open hills overlooking the Pacific Ocean and its deep redwood canyons. Djerassi calls the property the SMIP Ranch. SMIP originally stood for “Syntex Made It Possible.”

But, Felix Bloch is credited with giving the acronym another meaning—sic manebimus in pace, thus we’ll remain in peace. The Djerassi Foundation supports the complex of buildings that comprise the artist’s colony. Numerous works by resident artists are located among the redwood forests and on the open hills of SMIP. Nobel laureate Roald Hoffmann, also a poet/chemist, has been in residence three times at the colony, which has housed nearly 600 artists, working in literature, music, and the visual arts, as well as in dance and the performing arts.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,577
  • It's the TV, stupid!

Good work Tahoe for spelling this out for us ... what a train wreck.

And don't you guys think Watson's stuff is getting better all the
time ... ground breaking!

I certainly hope to see more of the dumb asses that got us into this mess wake up
and join the resistance.
St. Augustine: -The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself.-

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Proof: population is not out of control
Global Population Growth Rate is Declining Towards 0% (at around 10 B). Population is Not Out of Control.
Rising mortality joins falling fertility to slow population growth
The AIDS epidemic and water and cropland shortages problems largely ignored by the international community for years are the major cause.

For the first time since China's great famine claimed 30 million lives in 1959-61, rising death rates are slowing world population growth. When the United Nations released its biennial population update in late 1998, it reduced the projected world population for 2050 from 9.4 billion to 8.9 billion. Of the 500 million drop, roughly two thirds is because of falling birth rates, but one third is the result of rising death rates.
Population Growth II Not Enough People?
World Population: Major Trends

World population will grow significantly - despite falling fertility
Is it possible to completely stop world population growth during the next few decades? Yes, it is - if fertility, worldwide, would decline to 1.57 children per woman, the global population could stabilize at about 7.5 billion by 2025. This is the result of the 1996 UN low variant projections. Please note that this variant assumes a drastic drop of average fertility to a level of some 24% below replacement - in all countries worldwide. While such a steep decline, in fact, already happened in many European countries, it is rather unlikely that populous developing nations such as Pakistan, India, Indonesia or Nigeria - which greatly determine world population growth - would quickly follow this trend.

Notice they don't talk about alot of people (women) of childbearing years DIEING or becoming INFERTILE.
(Due to Global pandemic war or famine), That would be cruel.

I find it interesting the timing of his work in combination with Bisphenol-A. Carl Djerassi like Dodd spent the 30's - 40's looking at male and female hormones like  estrogen and testosterone and trying to create synthetic versions of them for manufacture. Carl won't admit to being a Eugenicist, but doesn't he have all the credentials for one?

Tests find harmful Bisphenol A in majority of soft drinks

Early uses and research
In the mid 1930s, not long before the first epoxy resins were created,
Sir Edward Charles Dodds, a British medical researcher, identified the estrogenic properties of bisphenol A.

In his search for the first synthetic estrogen, Dodds identified the estrogenicity of a number of chemicals with similar two-dimensional structures, including diethylstilbestrol (DES) and bisphenol A.

 Beginning in the 1940s, doctors prescribed the potent synthetic estrogen, DES, to millions of pregnant women to prevent miscarriages and other reproductive ‘problems,’ and meat producers injected it into livestock to increase meat production. Diethystilbestrol remained on the drug market for thirty years until it was banned in the early 1970s when the first epidemiological studies reported rare vaginal cancers in young women exposed to DES while in their mothers’ wombs—evidence that confirmed DES’s carcinogenicity.

A weaker estrogen, bisphenol A, never found use as a drug; its future was in plastics.  Several years after Dodds published his research on synthetic estrogens, chemists in the U.S. and Switzerland synthesized the first epoxy resins using bisphenol A.  Commercial production of epoxy resins began in the early 1950s.  In 1957, chemists discovered another use for bisphenol A—when polymerized (linked together in long chains), it forms a hard plastic, polycarbonate.  In response to expanding markets for plastics, the production of bisphenol A took off in the 1960s and 1970s.  U.S. production of bisphenol A tripled in the 1970s to reach just under a billion pounds by the early 1980s.
Sir (Edward) Charles Dodds, 1st Baronet (1899-1973)
The Dodds Baronetcy, of West Chiltington in the County of Sussex, is a title in the Baronetage of the United Kingdom. It was created on 10 February 1964 for Charles Dodds, President of the Royal College of Physicians from 1962 to 1966. As of 2007 the title is held by his son, the second Baronet, who succeeded in 1973.

Dodds, Sir (Edward) Charles, first baronet (1899–1973), medical scientist

Another good read...

In the 1950s, Margaret Sanger and her organization, Planned Parenthood Federation of  America, began funding research to develop a contraceptive that would be more effective  than condoms. One of the early researchers was Dr. Carl Djerassi, who worked at Syntex,  a drug firm. In 1951, the Syntex team succeeded in synthesizing a sex hormone. Dr.  Gregory Pincus and Dr. Min Cheu Chang from the Worcester Foundation for  Experimental Biology were also interested in birth control research. The Searle drug firm  invited Pincus to do research for them, and in 1953 Searle patented a compound similar  to Djerassi's. Pincus teamed up with Dr. John Rock from Harvard, and they began work on preventing ovulation using a sex hormone.

Pincus, Chang and Rock were all funded in part by Planned Parenthood. Also, in 1952,  Margaret Sanger persuaded a wealthy donor, Katherine Dexter McCormick, to provide  substantial funding for Pill research.  
idea was to upset the system using hormones taken by mouth. There is no direct  connection between the mouth and the ovaries. The question then and now is, how many  systems in the body will be disrupted before a drug taken at the top end of the body alters  the way an organ works in the middle of the body?  

Pincus and Rock developed an oral contraceptive, Enovid, that did suppress ovulation  and did not have massive and obvious side effects. They tested their drug on volunteers  and psychotics for one year, then moved to Puerto Rico, where they had a huge number  of women to use as potential lab rats.
Puerto Rico had been a target for population controllers for decades before Pincus's Pill  project arrived. In the 1930s, population controllers had opened a sterilization campaign  there, and had pushed through a law permitting the distribution of contraceptives by  trained eugenicists. Testing the Pill there was the obvious course to take.  

In 1956, they began testing in Puerto Rico. On April 22, 1960, the Food and Drug  Administration approved Enovid for use in the United States.  
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341

The disappearing Caucasian

Oh no! Carl is a not a Eugenicist! or maybe he is.....
Morrison Institute for Population and Resource Studies

As the number of people inhabiting the earth escalates at an unprecedented pace, a multifaceted effort will be necessary to contend with the ensuing pressures on the environment and natural resources. The Morrison Institute for Population and Resource Studies was founded in 1986 to solicit such an interdisciplinary cooperation from experts in the natural sciences, mathematics, engineering, public policy, economics and medicine. Research at the institute addresses questions ranging from the future of family planning in nations around the world, to genetic patterns of human migration, to the impact of population pressures on food supplies.

For example, in just a few decades China will be brimming with up to a million single men each year who cannot find wives ­ a combined result of the country's one-child policy and a preference for male children. The institute has been working with Chinese officials to craft workable solutions to this problem; one major recommendation is to weaken this preference by elevating both the economic and educational status of women.

A recently established initiative at the institute is participation in the Human Genome Diversity Project, an international program seeking to document the genetic variation of the human species worldwide. Goals of the project range from helping to clarify the major human migrations to increased understanding of factors leading to disease in many of the world's populations.
Representative investigators: Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Carl Djerassi, Marcus Feldman, Henry Greely, Shripad Tuljapurkar.
Contact: Marcus Feldman, director: (415) 725-1867;
1923 Born in Vienna, Austria, 29 October

1942 A.B. summa cum laude, chemistry, Kenyon College
1945 Ph.D., organic chemistry, University of Wisconsin

Professional Experience
1942-1943 Junior Research Chemist, Ciba Pharmaceutical Company
1945-1949 Research Chemist, Ciba Pharmaceutical Company

1949-1952 Associate Director of Chemical Research, Syntex S.A.
1952-1954 Associate Professor of Chemistry, Wayne State University
1954-1957 Professor of Chemistry, Wayne State University
1957-1960 Vice President for Research, Syntex S.A.
1959- Professor of Chemistry, Stanford University
1960-1964 Vice President for Research, Syntex Research
1960-1972 Director, Syntex Corporation
1964-1968 Executive Vice President, Syntex Research
1966-1978 Chairman, Board of Governors, Syva Associates
1968-1972 President, Syntex Research
1968-1983 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Zoecon Corporation
1975- Director, Cetus Corporation
1983- Chairman, Zoecon Corporation
Director, Catalytica, Inc.
Director, Teknowledge, Inc.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
So Carl's first job was with Ciba the creator of DDT.....
Oh, and CIBA and SanDoz is now Novartis!!

Don't forget to take your Flu shot!!!!
Novartis was created in 1996 through the merger of Ciba-Geigy and Sandoz, two companies with a rich and diverse corporate history. Throughout the years, Novartis and its predecessor companies have discovered and developed many
innovative products for patients and consumers worldwide

Novartis was created in 1996 from the merger of Ciba-Geigy and Sandoz Laboratories, both Swiss companies with long histories. Ciba-Geigy was formed in 1970 by the merger of J. R. Geigy Ltd (founded in Basel in 1758) and Ciba (founded in Basel in 1859). Combining the histories of the merger partners, the company's effective history spans 250 years.[9]

Ciba = DDT = In 1939, Geigy chemist Paul Hermann Müller discovered that DDT was effective against malaria-bearing insects. He received the Nobel Prize in Medicine for this work in 1948.

Ciba and Geigy merged in 1971 to form Ciba‑Geigy Ltd., and this company merged with Sandoz in 1996 to form Novartis.

Novartis = Sandoz = LSD = The psychedelic effects of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) were discovered at the Sandoz laboratories in 1943 by Albert Hofmann. Sandoz began clinical trials, and marketed the substance, from 1947 through the mid 1960s...
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
And guess what? Syntex S.A is now Roche
Company History:
Roche Bioscience was formed in 1995 following the acquisition of Syntex Corp. by Roche Holding Ltd. in November 1994.

Look at Syntex S.A. in Mexico City. Carl goes down to work for them after WWII, Germans in Mexico...

The pill, pygmy chimps, and Degas' horse By Carl Djerassi
Department of Chemistry, Stanford University, California 94305-5080.

The period from late 1949 through 1951 was an extraordinarily productive one in steroid chemistry and especially so at Syntex S.A. in Mexico City. Two of the most important Syntex contributions--the synthesis of 19-nor-17 alpha-ethynyltestosterone (norethindrone) and of cortisone from diosgenin--are described from a historical perspective.

PIP: The pharmaceutical industry contributed more to the published record of steroid research during the 1950s than any industry has ever contributed before to any chemical subdiscipline. Syntex, a research-oriented company in Mexico city, contributed much of the publication of industrial research of steroids.

Dr. Djerassi arrived at Syntex in 1949 as associate director of chemical research. He conducted partial aromatization studies leading him to the 1st synthesis of an oral contraceptive (OC) on October 15, 1951.

This steroid was 19-nor-17 alpha-ethynyltestosterone, later called norethistrone or norethindrone. Syntex submitted the product to a commercial laboratory in Madison, Wisconsin, for biological evaluation. It was indeed the most active, orally effective progestational hormone at the time. Syntex applied for a patent in November 1951.

In November 1954, clinical results of norethindrone used to treat various menstrual disorders and fertility problems was presented. G.D. Searle & Co. filed for a patent for the synthesis of the double bond isomer 13 of norethindrone called norethynodrel in August 1953. Acid or human gastric juice converts norethynodrel into norethindrone. Had it not been for Searle using norethindrone in its antimotion sickness drug, Dramamine, Syntex would have filed suit against Searle.

Syntex sponsored contraceptive trials with norethindrone. Various incidents prevented Syntex from obtaining US Food and Drug Administration approval to use norethindrone for contraceptive indications before Searle obtained approval to use norethynodrel.

By 1964, 3 companies including Syntex were marketing 2 mg doses of Syntex's norethindrone, the most widely used active ingredient in OCs. Dr. Djerassi also played a key role in the synthesis of cortisone from diosgenin, a chemical derived from Mexican yams. This synthesis was a more economical industrial route to cortisone than previous routes.
Did You Know? Birth control pills come from Mexican yams
by Tony Burton

Curiously, the synthetic female sex hormone called norethindrone was first synthesized from, believe it or not... Mexican-grown yams!

Equally interestingly, the Pill was not developed in a huge laboratory belonging to a major pharmaceutical company but in a relatively humble laboratory in Mexico City, belonging to a small company called Syntex. Syntex specialized in making steroids from Mexican yams, using methods of synthesis invented by a maverick biochemist, Russell Marker. Marker had published various studies on diosgenin, a saponin isolated from a Mexican yam species of the genus Dioscorea, and had discovered how to synthesize the human hormone testosterone and progesterone from diosgenin. After having his proposals for the large-scale production of human steroids from diosgenin turned down by U.S. pharmaceutical companies, Marker moved to Mexico and began his own, home-based, small scale production. This was so successful that a new company, Syntex, was soon born, specifically to make steroids from Mexican yams. Syntex quickly became the world's largest producer of progesterone, as well as making testosterone and the female hormone esterone.

Enter Carl Djerassi. Djerassi was an Austrian-born chemist who had completed his Ph.D. at the University of Wisconsin (1945) by researching the synthesis and transformation of steroids, including sex hormones. After working four years as a research chemist with CIBA Pharmaceutical Co. in Summit, New Jersey, he decided on a strategic move, in 1949, to join Syntex, in Mexico City, as associate director of chemical research.

At Syntex, Djerassi set out to see if diosgenin could be made to yield other steroids, which do not actually exist in nature, but which retain the biological activities of progesterone and are also orally active. The original aim of his team was to develop a drug for infertility and menstrual disorders that could be swallowed, as opposed to injected. Only two years later, on October 15, 1951, the group led by the then 28-year-old Djerassi, had synthesized norethindrone, a "super-potent orally active progestational agent", which turned out to be the key ingredient in The Pill. (Chemically, norethindrone is 17a-ethinyl-19-nortestosterone; its generic name in Europe is norethisterone).

Later, the drug's ability to suppress ovulation was demonstrated by Gregory Pingus at the Worcester Foundation in Massachusetts and clinical trials began. The rest, as they say, is history!.

Russell Marker
Russell Earl Marker (March 12, 1902 – March 23, 1995) was an eccentric American chemist who invented the octane rating system when he was working at the Ethyl Corporation. Later in his career he went on to found a steroid industry in Mexico when he successfully made synthetic progesterone from a Mexican yam in a process known as Marker degradation, which eventually led to the development of the birth control pill and a cheap, ample supply of cortisone at Syntex.

Russell Earl Marker was born on his father's farm near Hagerstown, Maryland, on March 12, 1902. He earned a B.S. degree in 1923 from the University of Maryland and an M.S. degree in physical chemistry in 1924. He started his doctoral research with Morris Kharasch at the univerisity. He completed his work for his thesis but needed to take some required physical chemistry courses. His temper caused him to leave the university without his degree. Kharasch officially approved Marker's thesis on organomercurials and quaternary alkyl hydrocarbons, but Marker never received a Ph.D. from Maryland. The university would award him an Honorary Doctor of Science in 1987.

Rockefeller Institute
By 1928, he started research with P.A. Levene at the Rockefeller Institute. Over the next six years, Marker did enough research for 32 papers on optical rotation and molecular configurations. By 1934, Marker wanted to change his focus to steroid research. When Levene refused, Marker accepted a position funded by Parke-Davis at Penn State University.

In 1936 Parke-Davis sent him a steroid extract from the urine of pregnant mares. From this, he isolated pregnanediol, which he converted by already published chemistry to 35 grams of progesterone in 1937. The batch of steroid he synthesized was the largest produced till that time. Parke-Davis provided annual funding that eventually reached $10,000. Ultimately, more than 160 papers in the steroid area were published.

In 1944, Marker cofounded Syntex. In May of 1945, Marker inquired as to the profits of the company and was told there were none. He severed all ties with Syntex, and the company was unable to make more progesterone because Marker not only had done the synthesis himself but had coded the reagent bottles and took his lab notebooks.

So who was running Syntex in 1949 (when Carl arrived) if Marker had left it?
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
As to Roche = Syntex

Don't forget your TamiFlu
Alleged Tamiflu monopoly
In a recent meeting of regional health ministers, Dr. Francisco J. Duque III, Secretary of the Philippines Department of Health, accused Roche of "monopolizing" the production and distribution of the drug known as Oseltamivir (brand name Tamiflu). Oseltamivir is considered to be the primary antiviral drug used to combat avian influenza, commonly known as the bird flu. Roche is the only drug company authorized to manufacture the drug, which was discovered by Gilead Sciences. Roche purchased the rights to the drug in 1996 and in 2005 settled a royalty dispute, agreeing to pay Gilead tiered royalties of 14-22% of annual net sales.[10]

So in 1949 Who was running SynTex? Carl got his job there from George Rosenkranz

George Rosenkranz (right) and Luis E. Miramontes (left), 2001 at UNAM

George Rosenkranz (born as György Rosenkranz, August 20, 1916, in Budapest) is a Mexican scientist in steroid research and a profesional bridge player. He was born in Hungary, educated in Switzerland and lived in Mexico for 66 years.

At Syntex corporation, he headed the research groups that synthesized a progestin used in some the first combined oral contraceptive pills and synthesized other useful steroids.

He was the Chairman of the Board of the corporation until his retirement in 1996.


Born in Budapest, Hungary, in 1916, Rosenkranz studied chemical engineering at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, where he also received a Ph.D. degree. His mentor and future Nobel Prize winner, Lavoslav Ružička, began Rosenkranz's interest in steroid research.

However, as Nazi sympathizers were active in Zurich. Ružička shielded Rosenkranz and other Jewish colleagues, but the scientists soon realized that their stay was putting pressure on their mentor. "We got together and we decided to leave Switzerland to protect him," Rosenkranz said in a 2002 article for the Pan American Health Organization's magazine.

He planned to go to Quito, Ecuador, and chair a university organic chemistry department. However, when while waiting in Havana, Cuba for his ship to Ecuador, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. The United States immediately entered World War II, and the traveller was stuck. Rosenkranz decided to make the best of his situation. He accepted the Cuban president Fulgencio Batista's offer to let all refugees stay in the country and work.

While there, he continued his Zurich work on steroid research. The important role of hormones in human health was already acknowledged by the scientists, but an easy and cheap way to recreate them did not exist yet. Rosenkranz tried using vegetables. He attracted the interest of Syntex; the Mexican company had made a discovery of cabeza de negro, a toxic yam from Mexican hills, produced a steroid that could be transformed into the hormone progesterone. Rosenkranz moved to Mexico City in 1945. However, after a year, the company's co-founders split, and professor Russell Marker left and took his steroid formulas with him.

Rosenkranz took his position.

It was a huge challenge. Rosenkranz had to figure out how to recreate Marker's chemical production processes. He didn't have much help: Syntex employed nine lab assistants and only one other chemist. He started working backward, analyzing samples of Marker's work to tease out the ingredients.

At the time, Mexico lacked a Ph.D. program in chemistry, so Rosenkranz recruited researchers from Mexico and around the world. When he couldn't find enough fully trained local chemists, he helped set up an Institute of Chemistry at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. He and his colleagues regularly worked at Syntex during the day and then spent the evenings teaching chemistry there. His team was soon reinforced with bright, young chemists, such as Carl Djerassi and Alejandro Zaffaroni.

Rosenkranz also started the Institute for Molecular Biology in Palo Alto.

The hires paved the way for Syntex's next big discoveries. In the late 1940s, discovery of cortisone as an arthritis treatment was a hot topic, but no one had been able to create it cheaply and quickly. Rosenkranz's team started working in two shifts, and the long hours of work paid off—in 1951, Rosenkranz and his fellow researchers first submitted a paper on the synthesis of cortisone.

Five months later, under the direction of Djerassi and Rosenkranz, Mexican chemistry student Luis E. Miramontes recreated norethindrone.

The company reached an agreement with American company Parke-Davis to market their "superhormone" as a pregnancy aid. Before the two firms were able to complete the deal, other parties had realized a wider use for norethindrone—as a pregnancy inhibitor.

Parke-Davis, worried that groups opposed to birth control would boycott its other products, wouldn't market Syntex's product as a contraceptive.

By 1962, a Johnson & Johnson division introduced Syntex's norethindrone product as a component of its birth control pill OrthoNovum.

In 1964, Syntex came out with its own birth control product, Norinyl.

Rosenkranz understood that peer recognition, not just commercial success, was a key to keep scientists happy and productive. Unlike other pharmaceutical companies, Syntex published most of its steroid research. Between 1961 and 1962, scientists patented 1,378 new steroid compounds, 37% of those owned by Syntex.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Beat that Eugenic's Drum - But I NEED MORE COWBELL!!
by Worldwatch Institute HOLD FOR RELEASE Saturday, April 10, 1999 6:00 PM EDT
Our Demographically Divided World:  Rising Mortality Joins Falling Fertility To Slow Population Growth

For the first time since China's great famine claimed 30 million lives in 1959-61, rising death rates are slowing world population growth. When the United Nations released its biennial population update in late 1998, it reduced the projected world population for 2050 from 9.4 billion to 8.9 billion. Of the 500 million drop, roughly two thirds is because of falling birth rates, but one third is the result of rising death rates.

"Tragically, the world is dividing into two parts: one where population growth is slowing as fertility falls, and one where population growth is slowing as mortality rises," said Lester R. Brown, co-author with Gary Gardner and Brian Halweil of Beyond Malthus: Nineteen Dimensions of the Population Challenge.

 "That rising death rates have already reduced the projected population for 2050 by 150 million represents a failure of our political institutions unmatched since the outbreak of World War II."

The world is now starting to reap the consequences of its past neglect of the population issue, according to the new book released by the Worldwatch Institute and funded by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation. The two regions where death rates are already rising, or are likely to do so, are sub-Saharan Africa and the Indian subcontinent, which together contain 1.9 billion people, or one third of humanity.

"Without clearly defined strategies by governments in countries with rapid population growth to quickly lower birth rates and a commitment by the international community to support them, one third of humanity could slide into a demographic dark hole," said Brown.
This rise in mortality does not come as a surprise to those who track world population trends and who know that a 3 percent annual growth rate will lead to a twenty-fold population increase in a century. Although population growth has slowed in most devel oping countries, it has not slowed enough in many to avoid serious problems.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
I am going to recap this thread, but there are a few loose ends left on the history....

Oh does anybody get the irony that this "Mexican" discovery is not marketed (much) in Mexico?

Also notice that Russell Marker believed that his partners "Dr. Emeric Somlo, a Hungarian, and Dr. Frederick Lehmann, a young German doctor" ripped him off for the profits of his invention and so he walked off taking his process with him.

Also note that Dr. Emeric Somlo and Dr. Frederick Lehmann, after ripping off Marker, had a 100'Gs to restart Syntex and hire Rosenkranz...

Also notice that when they had the oral "Pill" in 1956, NO ONE WANTED IT. But by 1961 the situation had changed... With Kennedy a Catholic in office... hmmm....

Remarks by Dr. Alejandro Zaffaroni
Recipient of the Franklin Institute’s Bower Award
The Wharton School – 29 April 2005
Syntex S.A. was founded in 1944 in Mexico City.  Their initial interest was to manufacture newly identified human steroid hormones.  The company’s initial founders were Russell Marker, Frederick Lehmann and Emeric Somlo.  These three individuals had been working on the hormone business for quite some time but it was Marker who had found a source for diosgenin, a yam growing wild in the Mexican jungles.  Marker had developed a four-step process for converting diosgenin into progesterone.  

Things were going very well for Syntex until the three founders decided to break up.  Marker left and the company was in need of a new chemist.  In 1945, they hired a young chemist named George Rosenkranz.  Once Rosenkranz joined the company he reestablished the chemistry lab and began looking at the other major steroid hormones.  A few years later in 1949, Rosenkranz hired Carl Djerassi who had done some graduate work in the problem of synthesizing estrogenic hormones. I [Dr. Alejandro Zaffaroni] joined Syntex in 1951.  Syntex’s continued success bore fruit when by the end of 1951 it won the “cortisone race” and also synthesized norethindrone, the first oral progestational agent and precursor to “the pill”.

One of the reasons for Syntex’s success was that Syntex was able to produce very large quantities of steroid raw materials at very low cost.  It was Upjohn, in collaboration with Syntex, that utilized the paper chromatography technique I developed to produce cortisone at the lowest cost and in the shortest time and thus was able to upstage all other pharmaceutical companies.

Upon realizing Syntex’s potential, George and I started to transform Syntex from a chemical manufacturing company to a pharmaceutical company.

At one point, we realized that to become a top tier pharmaceutical company we needed to move to the United States.  Back then, most of the large pharmaceutical companies were located in Europe or on the East Coast.

Carl Djerassi, one of our distinguished Syntex scientists, had recently started teaching at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California.  When we started debating about where to locate the company’s U.S. headquarters, Carl encouraged us to settle in Palo Alto.

The question of who would establish Syntex in the U.S. remained.  I accepted the challenge and relocated to the United States to establish Syntex Laboratories in Palo Alto, California.  It was now 1961 and my vision for the future of the company compelled me to negotiate a lease for 100 acres in Stanford Industrial Park as the future headquarters of Syntex.  There are those who thought I was out of my mind, but I was convinced that what Syntex had to offer was truly unique and that we would need plenty of land for future growth.  

Once the new headquarters were fully operational there was no looking back.  I saw my role expanding as I became totally involved in the promoting of Syntex’s products in the U.S. and throughout the world.  My extensive travels helped me to see my vision becoming a reality as I was actually taking part in the establishment of a worldwide network of distributors and Syntex subsidiaries.  My efforts were channeled into the training and education of our partners teaching them how to use our products and the science behind those products.  This kept me in touch with how our products were being accepted and helped me to find new ways for expanding our market.

Two years after setting up our offices in California we had expanded Syntex’s reach into Canada, Europe, Japan, South America, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand.

Syntex was a leader in the steroid field.  Between 1961 and 1962, 1,378 new steroid compounds were patented or reported worldwide. Of those, Syntex owned 37%.

Those were exciting days.  I was involved in all aspects of the business from the science to the management of the company.  We were very successful and Syntex became a worldwide pharmaceutical success.

Mexico's Pill Pioneer
by Gerald S. Cohen
A trick with yams

An inedible yam called cabeza de negro, which grew wild in Mexico, proved to be a very practical source for a sapogenin called diosgenin. On one trip to Mexico, Marker gathered 10 tons of the root, succeeded in producing about three kilograms of progesterone, and then searched for partners to fund his work.

After Parke-Davis rejected him, he pored through a Mexico City phone book and located Laboratorios Hormona. The tiny firm founded by two European refugees, Emeric Somlo and Frederick Lehmann, understood the enormous financial potential of the process.

On Jan. 21, 1944, they incorporated Syntex, with the intent of using Marker to help synthesize pure crystalline progesterone for pharmaceutical companies. With an initial capitalization of $100,000, Syntex was able to construct additional laboratories and synthesize 30 kilograms of progesterone within the first 12 months.

Before the year was out, however, Marker had a disagreement with his partners, pulled up stakes, and took key components of the synthesis process with him

Meanwhile, Rosenkranz had been tinkering with some Cuban yams. An edible variety, they apparently lacked the toxic sapogenins critical to a successful synthesis. "Then I imported to Cuba from Mexico the sarsaparilla root and made some small quantities of progesterone," he says. Word of Rosenkranz's work reached Somlo and Lehmann from business associates who had been traveling through Cuba. Eager to restart their stalled chemical process, Somlo and Lehmann invited Rosenkranz to Mexico City for a job interview.

The date of the interview was Aug. 6, 1945, the day the Enola Gay dropped the first atom bomb on Hiroshima
Two months later Rosenkranz began fulfilling orders for progesterone. "I decided I wanted to make Syntex the Dupont of Mexico," he says. "Little did I know."
The steroids race

For about a decade, three teams of chemists in Switzerland, at Columbia University in New York, and at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., had been working on isolating steroid hormones found in the adrenal glands. The U.S. government was intensely interested in learning more about this class of hormones, called corticoids, and in 1940 began funding cooperative research in this important field. In 1946, scientists at Merck & Co. Inc. had succeeded in synthesizing cortisone from animal-sourced materials through a 36-step process considered too tedious and expensive for industrial purposes.

Born a banker's son in Montevideo, Uruguay, Alejandro Zaffaroni studied medicine in his home country and then earned a doctorate in biochemistry at the University of Rochester, New York.

In 1951, he went to work for Syntex, which was then a small firm headquartered in Mexico City that was pioneering the production of synthetic steroid hormones. While he was at Syntex, his work with Dr. Carl Djerassi became the basis of the Pill, the oral contraceptive.

As a supervisor of both research and marketing, Zaffaroni helped transform the small firm into a large pharmaceutical house with research facilities in Palo Alto.

A native of Montevideo, Uruguay, Dr. Zaffaroni received his B.Sc. from the University of Montevideo in 1941, and his Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Rochester in 1949. In 1951 Dr. Zaffaroni joined Syntex Corporation, a small chemical company in Mexico, that was prominent in steroid research. He subsequently played a key role in transforming it into a major pharmaceutical company headquartered in the United States that pioneered the development of the birth control pill. This was the beginning of Dr. Zaffaroni’s extraordinary career in scientific and business entrepreneurship. Eventually he became President of Syntex Laboratories and President of Syntex Research Institute.
Mexico's Pill Pioneer
by Gerald S. Cohen

The rush to market

The cortisone discovery put Syntex on the map. Upjohn just a few months later discovered a one-step process for manufacturing an effective and simpler compound called hydrocortisone. But the process relied on tons of progesterone, a quantity that could be satisfied only by Syntex's patented process. Upjohn's discovery translated into an immediate infusion of $5 million in cash for Syntex.

These many months of work also set up Rosenkranz's team for the discovery of the birth control pill. Progesterone, testosterone, estrone, estradiol, and cortisone were all close relatives of a soon-to-be-synthesized compound called norethindrone. In October of 1951, Luis Miramontes, a college student under the direction of Rosenkranz and fellow researcher Carl Djerassi, synthesized norethindrone, the active ingredient for what would become the oral birth control pill. Syntex patented norethindrone in November of that year. It would take nine more years of experimentation and patient trials for an FDA-approved pill to make it to market, and it wouldn't be Syntex's product.

During this period, Rosenkranz recalls that religion and politics, rather than science, drove scientific decisions. "I went around Europe and the world offering the contraceptive, but nobody wanted it," he says.

Because Syntex did not have the resources to market the product internationally, it first offered to become the bulk supplier of norethindrone to Parke-Davis. But in 1956, the decision by a company to manufacture an oral contraceptive meant risking a boycott of its whole product line by religious opponents. Ultimately, the big drug manufacturer backed away from the deal

Meanwhile, G.D. Searle and Co. moved ahead with a compound remarkably similar to norethindrone, patented its discovery, and went to market with it in 1960. In the end, it made little difference which company got there first. A few years later, Syntex was able to capture the majority of the market share through licensing agreements for norethindrone with Ortho, Eli Lilly, and a once-again-interested Parke-Davis. Syntex also brought its own oral contraceptive to the market.

But the pill was neither the first nor the last of Rosenkranz's major accomplishments at Syntex. His team attracted the interest of Wall Street investor Charles Allen, who with his brother in 1956 purchased Syntex Corp., parent company of the Mexican and U.S. Syntex entities, and took it public in 1958 with a stock authorization of 2 million shares, of which 1.2 million were immediately issued. Rosenkranz, named one year earlier as president and CEO, was retained.

In 1964, Rosenkranz decided to move the company to Palo Alto so that it could be closer to its major market. In the midst of the Palo Alto expansion, Syntex experienced one of the greatest stock runs of the decade. After announcing a three-for-one split of stock on July 31, 1963, Syntex stock soared.

Shares that had sold for only $5.75 at the beginning of the year rose as high as $227.50 by mid-October. On November 1, Syntex stock rose $21, the year's most active single-day rise on any major exchange.

Mexico's Pill Pioneer by Gerald S. Cohen
An era ends

In 1994, Syntex Corp. was acquired by pharmaceutical giant Roche Holding Ltd. of Basel, Switzerland. The takeover marked the end of an era: Rosenkranz still refers to it as "the unhappy end of the Syntex saga." But the saga is a remarkable one. In a relatively short period, and largely because of Rosenkranz's vision, a $100,000 investment in a tiny Mexico City chemical house was transformed into an international pharmaceutical giant worth $5.3 billion.

On October 15th, 1951, the chemistry student Luis Miramontes, working under the direction of Djerassi and the director of the laboratory Jorge Rosenkranz synthesized the compound".

 Carl Djerassi, Luis Miramontes and George Rosenkranz of the Mexican chemical company Syntex are listed on the patent for norethindrone as its co-inventors. Djerassi "is now known sometimes as the 'Father of the Pill'"[2]. The historians, nevertheless, agree that the invention, or the first synthesis, is the work of Djerassi, Miramontes, and Rosenkranz.[3][

In 2000, the contraceptive pill was denominated three times as one of the most important inventions of the last 2000 years, by a group of outstanding personalities, that included several Nobel laurates[9].

In 2004, the invention of Luis E. Miramontes was chosen as the twentieth most important one of all the times. The election was organized by SCENTA, an initiative of The Engineering and Technology Board of the United Kingdom.

So who were Frederick Lehmann and Emeric Somlo (the backers with the 100G's)?
Pioneer of the Pill, Dr. George Rosenkranz, Honored At University of Mexico's 450th Anniversary Celebration
Business Wire, Oct 9, 2001

Rosenkranz was born on August 20, 1916 in Budapest, Hungary. After earning a degree in chemical engineering in 1938 and a doctorate in technical sciences in 1940 at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Dr. Rosenkranz began his scientific career in 1940 as a research assistant under Professor Leopold Ruzicka, winner of the Nobel Prize for work in steroid chemistry.

Fleeing World War II Europe, Dr. Rosenkranz landed in Cuba where he became director of research for Cuba's largest pharmaceutical firm. In 1945, he was recruited by Dr. Emeric Somlo, a fellow Hungarian, and Dr. Frederick Lehmann, a young German doctor, to join the fledgling Syntex, which they had founded just one year earlier.
Pioneer of the Pill, Dr. George Rosenkranz, Honored At University of Mexico's 450th...

"I leave to others any debate about the ultimate worth of the Pill," Dr. Rosenkranz has said of the contraceptive used by 20 million Americans and by more than 300 million women worldwide since its inception.

But what the Doctor has put beyond debate is the value of research and teamwork as keys to scientific innovation. "We must never forget that original research is the lifeblood of the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry (and) that an interdisciplinary team effort is the indispensable motor of significant research achievement."

Dr. Rosenkranz is accepting the award nearly 50 years to the day of when Dr. Luis Miramontes, Dr. Carl Djerassi and he first synthesized an orally effective synthetic hormone, norethisterone or norethindrone, which made oral contraceptives possible. The discovery took place in a small laboratory at Syntex S.A. in his adopted home of Mexico City.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
The Disappearing Caucasian....
During the 1990s, for example, the total fertility rate (TFR, or the average number of children women would have during their lifetime under existing fertility rates) was highest in the United States for Hispanic women, at 2.8 in 1995 and 2.73 in 2000. African American women had the next highest fertility levels nationally-a TFR of 2.13 in both 1995 and 2000. For women in the other racial groups (non-Hispanic white, Asian, and American Indian), fertility levels were somewhat lower, with TFRs in the 1.8 to 1.9 range.

The total fertility rate for non-Hispanic white women was 1.78 in 1995 and 1.87 in 2000. (Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Health Statistics, "Revised Birth and Fertility Rates for the 1990s and New Rates for Hispanic Populations, 2000 and 2001: United States," by Brady E. Hamilton, Paul D. Sutton, and Stephanie J. Ventura, National Vital Statistics Report 51, no.12 (Aug. 4, 2003).)
Revised Birth and Fertility Rates for the United States, 2000 and 2001 :
Because only one race is currently reported in birth certificate data, the 2000 census populations were ‘‘bridged’’ to the single race categories specified in the Office of Management and Budget’s 1977 guidelines for race and ethnic statistics in Federal reporting, which are still in use in the collection of vital statistics data
(i.e. "Non-Hispanic White" rates are inflated)
The Next Big Headline: Most Births Minority in 2011.
May 29, 2007

The number of non-white Americans exceeded 100 million for the first time in 2006, according to a just-released Census Bureau report.

According to the latest figures, non-Hispanic whites accounted for 66.4 percent of U.S. population on July 1, 2006. Minorities were 33.6 percent of the total. As recently as 1990,  76 percent of Americans called themselves non-Hispanic white. In 1965, the American population was 88 percent white.

This shift is essentially all caused by public policy—specifically, the Immigration Act of 1965 and the simultaneous collapse of law enforcement against illegal immigration. As a result, the U.S. demographic balance has been completely destabilized.

Less reported, the recent data showed a growing generational racial divide between the young and older persons living in the U.S. [New Demographic Racial Gap Emerges by Sam Roberts, New York Times, May 17, 2007]

In 2006 white, non-Hispanics accounted for:

•   56 percent of persons 9 and younger

•   60 percent of persons 10 to 19

•   67 percent of persons 20 to 64

•   81 percent of persons 65 and older

From July 1, 2005 to July 1, 2006, the white population grew by a miniscule 0.26 percent. The minority population grew by 2.42 percent.

•   If the white and minority populations continue growing at their respective 2005-06 growth rates, present day minorities will attain majority status by the year 2038. (Table 1.) (This is much earlier than the Census Bureau projects, primarily because they presume a reduction in legal immigration.)

And this extrapolation does not capture the dramatic situation into which Washington has led the white population.

A basic measure of fertility is the hypothetical number of births a woman would have over her childbearing years if she experienced the age-specific birthrates for her group. Based on 2004 fertility rates (the latest available), non-Hispanic white women will have 1.847 children; non-Hispanic Black women, 2.02 children; and Hispanic women, 2.82 children. [PDF]

The “replacement” rate—2.1 births per women—is considered the value at which a group can exactly replace itself over the course of a generation. Fertility rates of non-Hispanic whites were 12 percent below the replacement rate in 2004. They are expected to remain low in future decades. This will eventually shrink the white population.

Births to white, non-Hispanic women have already started to fall in absolute terms. (Table 2)

White, non-Hispanic mothers gave birth to 2,244,288 children in 2006. That was about 28,000 fewer births than in 2005, a decline of 1.25 percent.

Over the same period births to minority mothers rose by 2.78 percent.

In 2006 45.9 percent of live births were to minority mothers. That was up from 45.0 percent in 2005.

Here’s the next big headline (you read it on VDARE.COM first):

•   If white births continue shrinking and minority births growing at the present rate, minorities will account for more than half of all births by 2011.

By 2021 more than 60 percent of births will be to minorities (Table 2.)

Of course, if immigration were completely cut off now, the date at which minorities would become the U.S. majority would be greatly postponed—probably into the 22nd century.

And, if immigrant stock birthrates began to decline to the American norm, as they arguably will, it might never happen at all.

But right now, the U.S. federal government is literally doing what the poet Bertolt Brecht suggested only satirically that the East German communist government should do.

It (Government) is dissolving the people and electing a new one.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline barndoor77

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,026
TahoeBlue Kudos to you - you did some serious research.

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Chelsea Clinton Laments: My Great Grandmother Did Not Have Access to Planned Parenthood
Rebecca Oas, Ph.D. | New York, NY | | 6/20/13

New York, NY (CFAM) — From the stage at the recent Women Deliver conference, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s daughter Chelsea revealed that her much-admired maternal grandmother was the child of unwed teenage parents who “did not have access to services that are so crucial that Planned Parenthood helps provide.”

Chelsea’s grandmother was born of an unintended pregnancy. And new research shows that her family is not alone in treasuring a person who – if Planned Parenthood had been successful – would not have been born.

Over 60% of women who originally stated their intention to have no more children classified subsequent births as wanted or, at worst, mistimed. Callahan presented her findings at the 2013 meeting of the Population Association of America.

LifeNews Note: Rebecca Oas writes for the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Re: Co-Creator of the Pill Laments Resulting Demographic "Horror Scenario"
« Reply #17 on: February 02, 2015, 01:58:21 pm »
Carl Djerassi - Finally he's Dead IN HELL

Carl Djerassi, father of the Pill - obituary

Chemist, novelist, poet and philanthropist who created the world’s first contraceptive pill
5:50PM GMT 02 Feb 2015
Carl Djerassi, who has died aged 91, was a self-proclaimed “intellectual polygamist”, novelist, poet, collector and patron of the arts, dandy, entrepreneur and one of the most published chemists in history; he was best known, however, as the man who sparked a sexual and social revolution by synthesising the first oral contraceptive.

In addition to being the “Father of the Pill”, Djerassi’s name was on the patent for the world’s first antihistamines and he was a pioneer in the field of non-toxic pesticides
. In his later years, he turned to writing fiction — novels, plays and essays — which explored the social and ethical dilemmas involved in reproductive medicine and scientific endeavour

Carl Djerassi was born on October 23 1923 into an assimilated Jewish family in Vienna.
Both his parents were physicians, his father an expert in venereal diseases (though he called himself a dermatologist as a cover to preserve the reputations of his wealthy patients), his mother a dentist.

The family moved to Bulgaria, his father’s native country, when Carl was young, but Carl and his mother returned to Vienna so that he could attend the Viennese Realgymnasium — the school attended by Sigmund Freud. He got used to the family living apart and it was only when he was in his early teens that he discovered that his parents had, in fact, divorced when he was about six. After the Anschluss, Djerassi’s father returned to Vienna and remarried his mother in order to evacuate the family to Bulgaria. The marriage was annulled two days later. In 1939 Djerassi and his mother were among the lucky few accepted as part of America’s Jewish quota.

He began at the top, writing a letter to Eleanor Roosevelt, who passed it on to the Institute of International Education.

He was offered a scholarship to a Presbyterian college in Missouri and went on to take a degree in Chemistry at Kenyon College, Ohio. He continued with postgraduate research at the University of Wisconsin and became an American citizen in 1945.
Carl Djerassi’s third wife Diane died in 2007, and he is survived by a son.

Carl Djerassi, born October 23 1923, died January 30 2015

| - - - - -

Institute of International Education

IIE was established in 1919 in the aftermath of World War I by Nobel Peace Prize winners Nicholas Murray Butler, President of Columbia University, and Elihu Root, former Secretary of State, and by Stephen Duggan, Sr., Professor of Political Science at the College of the City of New York and IIE's first President. They believed that we could not achieve lasting peace without greater understanding between nations—and that international educational exchange formed the strongest basis for fostering such understanding.
IIE History 1930s
The Institute established the Emergency Committee to Aid Displaced German Scholars, an initiative that would come to aid such distinguished individuals as Martin Buber, Paul Tillich and Jacques Maritain and assist others fleeing from Spanish and Italian fascism as well. Edward R. Murrow began his career as IIE's Assistant Director at this time, helping to find lectureships for hundreds of European refugee scholars. In the 1930s, IIE began expanding its activities beyond Europe, opening the first exchanges with the Soviet Union and Latin America.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Re: Co-Creator of the Pill Laments Resulting Demographic "Horror Scenario"
« Reply #18 on: September 24, 2018, 02:26:54 pm »
bump -  for the ultimate genocide
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Co-Creator Birth Control Pill Laments Resultin Demographic "Horror Scenario"
« Reply #19 on: February 07, 2019, 01:12:48 pm »
Bump for After Birth Abortion  - Infanticide ...
Interesting is the other pill developers ( McCormick/Planned Parenthood) that are lionized in this following article but were NOT the big discovers of the Pill ...  Carl Djerassi and his pals ... More investigation is needed .... Syntex was the big winner ... but Planned Parenthood sold the idea... ?
Gregory Goodwin Pincus

Pincus was born in a wealthy Jewish family, he studied in the best University of New England, worked in Cambridge and the universities of Berlin, where he participated in research on genetics, reproductive biology and physiology of animals.

After the Second world war Pincus organized the Worcester Foundation for experimental biology, who helped American soldiers suffering from the effects of stress.
Gregory Goodwin Pincus

 The invention Gregory Pincus influenced the effectiveness of family planning in the United States, where rates have drastically increased the use of the pill, which has become a better alternative to sterilization. Statistics showed that the prevention of pregnancy has decreased from six to four per woman in 1965.

To some extent the invention of the contraceptive pill Gregory Pincus was the impetus for the sexual revolution in the late 1960-ies, when an unwanted pregnancy has been excluded and helped women feel better about premarital sex.
In order to prove the safety of "the pill," human trials had to be conducted. These were initiated on infertility patients of Dr. John Rock in Brookline, Massachusetts using progesterone in 1953 and then three different progestins in 1954. Puerto Rico was selected as a trial site in 1955, in part because there was an existing network of 67 birth control clinics serving low-income women on the island. Trials began there in 1956 and were supervised by Dr. Edris Rice-Wray.

Some of the women experienced side effects from "the pill" (Enovid) and Dr. Edris Rice-Wray wrote Pincus and reported that Enovid "gives one hundred percent protection against pregnancy [but causes] too many side reactions to be acceptable". Pincus and Rock disagreed based on their experience with patients in Massachusetts and conducted research showing that placebos caused similar side effects. The trials went on and were expanded to Haiti, Mexico and Los Angeles despite high attrition rates, due to the large number of women eager to try this form of contraception.

In May 1960, the FDA extended Enovid's approved indications to include contraception.

fyi the big killer is the "Birth" Kontrol Pill
THIS DAY IN HISTORY     May 09, 1960
FDA approves the pill

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves the world?s first commercially produced birth-control Enovid-10 , made by the G.D. Searle Company of Chicago, Illinois.
She planned to attend medical school, but instead married Stanley Robert McCormick, the youngest son of Cyrus McCormick and heir to the International Harvester fortune, on September 15, 1904.[1] In September 1905, they moved into a house in Brookline, Massachusetts. The couple did not have any children. ... In September 1906, he was hospitalized for over a year at McLean Hospital and was originally diagnosed with dementia praecox,[2] an early label for what is now today known as schizophrenia ... In 1909, Stanley was declared legally incompetent and his guardianship divided between Katharine and the McCormick family.[3]
Throughout the 1920s McCormick worked with Sanger on birth control issues, McCormick smuggled diaphragms from Europe to New York City for Sanger's Clinical Research Bureau, and in 1927 she hosted a reception of delegates attending the 1927 World Population Conference at her home in Geneva. Katharine helped smuggle and distribute more than 1,000 diaphragms to Sanger's clinics.[5] In that year McCormick also turned to the science of endocrinology to aid her husband, believing that a defective adrenal gland caused his schizophrenia.
In 1953 McCormick met Gregory Goodwin Pincus through Margaret Sanger. Pincus had been working on developing a hormonal birth control method since 1951 and his own research laboratory, The Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology.[8] The drug company that supported Pincus stopped funding his pioneering research because he had yet to make a profit. As a result, Katharine started to fund Pincus's research foundation, The Worcester Foundation for Experimental biology. The donations started off at $100,000 annually, and later $150,000-$180,000 up until her death in 1967.[8]

In sum, McCormick had provided almost an entire $2 million ($23 million today) of her own money into the development of contraceptive pill. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the sale of the Pill in 1957 for menstrual disorders and added contraception to its indications in 1960. Even after the pill was approved, she continued to fund Pincus's lab and research on ways into improving birth control research through the 1960s
She died on December 28, 1967 in Boston, Massachusetts, aged 92. Her will provided $5 million to the Stanford University School of Medicine to support female physicians, $5 million to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which funded the Katharine Dexter McCormick Library in Manhattan, New York City, and $1 million to the Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology.
The Pill Turns 50 ? TIME Considers the Contraceptive Revolution
April 26, 2010
Carl Djerassi was born in Vienna, Austria, but spent the first years of his infancy in Sofia, Bulgaria, the home of his father, Samuel Djerassi, a dermatologist and specialist in sexually transmitted diseases.[5][6] His mother was Alice Friedmann, a Viennese dentist and physician. Both parents were Jewish.[1]

I have my friend Karen to thank for meeting one of the eminent persons of our century. Carl Djerassi played a leading role in the society, because he discovered the anti baby pill. As I met him in May 2013, I couldnt believe he shortly become 90 years. He was mentally fit and we had a nice summer day all together in my house with interesting discussions and a lot of laughter.
With his major contribution to the development of the oral contraceptive pill in 1951, Carl Djerassi significantly changed the life of women and the dynamics of relationships
 As he could not afford to study medicine, he accepted a position as junior chemist at pharmaceutical giant Ciba in New Jersey, where he developed one of the first two antihistamines, tripelennamine, at age 19.
After receiving a research scholarship and earning his PHD in Chemistry in Wisconsin with a focus on steroids, he started to work on the synthesis of cortisone gained from plants in a small team at Syntex in Mexico.
Taken up by womens rights activists Margaret Sanger and Katharine McCormick, as well as biologist Gregory Pincus, Djerassis discovery directly led to the development of the first birth control pill changing the world for women as we knew it.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5

Offline Jackson Holly

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,577
  • It's the TV, stupid!


They slammed the white world with the pill
while at the same time blasting us with anti-birth
'population explosion' and feminazi propaganda ...
all designed to implement their REPLACEMENT
IMMIGRATION plan ... and pulled it all off
like clockwork within two generations.
St. Augustine: -The truth is like a lion; you don't have to defend it.
Let it loose; it will defend itself.-

Offline TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20,341
Woody Allen Sexual Research
This edited clip is from Woody Allen's 1972 film, "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex *But Were Afraid to Ask."

I wonder if these girls are on the Jewish developed invention "The Pill"
Tel Aviv & Jerusalem | 2 Sunny Cities - 1 Break!
Bar Refaeli swimsuit ad too hot for Israel TV
A swimsuit commercial featuring Israeli supermodel Bar Refaeli has been censored by Israel?s commercial television authority.

| - --

Jewish tradition ascribed the practice of birth control to the depraved humanity before Noah (Gen. R. 23:2, 4; Rashi to Gen. 4:19, 23). The sole explicit reference in the Bible to what may be considered as some form of birth control occurs in Genesis 38:9?10: the Lord punished Onan by death because he had "spilled his seed on the ground" to prevent the birth of a child from the *levirate marriage to his deceased brother's wife Tamar. On the strength of this passage, and as constituting a deliberate violation of the first commandment to "be fruitful and multiply" (Gen. 1:28), the Talmud sternly inveighs against "bringing forth the seed in vain," considering it a cardinal sin (Nid. 13a).
Under no circumstances, however, does Jewish law sanction any contraceptive acts or safeguards on the part of the male, nor does it ever tolerate the use or distribution of birth control devices outside marriage
 The sources of Jewish law and morals do not present the problem of "the population explosion" as relevant to birth control. According to some rabbinic authorities, the restrictions on birth control do not necessarily apply to non-Jews as the latter are not held to be bound by the commandment to "be fruitful and multiply" (see Mishneh le-Melekh, to Maim., Yad, Melakhim 10:7).
In Israel, fertility rates for Jewish women in 1995 were down to 2.6 children, as opposed to a high of 4.0 in 1950 and as opposed to 4.7 in 1995 among Israeli Arabs (and 7.4 in Gaza). The Jewish birthrate is appreciably higher only among the Orthodox who, for religious reasons, do not usually resort to birth control. In common with the attitude of most Protestant denominations, Reform Judaism would generally leave the decision on birth control to the individual conscience, recognizing social and economic factors no less than the medical motivation.
Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole ; He shall deliver thee in six troubles: yea, in seven there shall no evil touch thee. - Job 5