Pharmaceuticals five times more damaging to health, say researchers
by Paul Fassa
Regardless of what members of the medical monopoly bound by Big
Pharma reveal as dangerous or fraudulent, their viewpoint still holds
pharmaceuticals as the only medicine that works, never mind herbs,
alternative medicine, whole organic foods, and supplements.
That’s the medical monopoly mindset, which is shared by both innocent
ignorant believers, whose livelihoods depend on doing what they’re told
while practicing denial, and the duplicitous manipulators who control
the snake oil show and benefit the most.
A slight crack appeared briefly in their medical arrogance, however.
Researchers from Stanford Medical School created databases that prove
there are five times more adverse effects from pharmaceuticals than
displayed or publicised.
Their research
The researchers created a computerised dual database system to
analyse data from the FDA’s (Food and Drugs Administration) Adverse
Event Reporting System (AERS).
Their observation that safety trials are conducted on the public
after a drug hits the market is noteworthy.
They also mentioned that clinical trials for obtaining FDA approval
are insufficient for assuming safety for everyone within all situations.
However, their viewpoint is still locked into that medical monopoly
mindset mentioned earlier.
The Stanford research is an attempt to provide more knowledge for
better prescription advice to minimise side effects.
But there is no concession to any other modality of medical
treatment. In other words, they want to clean up their act a bit, but
not fold up their snake oil wagons to move on and let others show their
wares.
The Stanford study was reported in the March 14, 2012 edition of
Science Translational Medicine by lead author Russ Altman, and his
graduate student assistant Nicholas Tatonetti.
Efforts to clean up their act are shallow and limited
Over a decade ago the Journal of American Medicine (JAMA) reported
that the fourth highest cause of death was properly prescribed
pharmaceuticals.
In 2000, JAMA published an even more damning medical death report by
Dr. Barbara Stanfield of John Hopkins University called “Is US Health
Really the Best in the World”. Dr. Stanfield commented in a 2009
interview: “Since the commentary was written, many more dangerous drugs
have been added to the marketplace.”
Adding improperly prescribed or “off label” drugs puts the death toll
from Big Pharma “medicine” even higher.
These reports don’t include over-the-counter-drugs that also
contribute to a high adverse reaction toll, even deaths. Instead of
confronting these statistics, the FDA and AMA engage in marginalizing
and suppressing other healing modalities that are safe and effective by
claiming they’re dangerous.
Dr. Ray Strand, author of Death by Prescription asserted in a 2005
interview that the FDA should demand adverse effect reports from medical
professionals, the way it’s done in Europe and the UK, and clinical
trials should be funded by the government instead of Big Pharma’s vast
financial resources.
Currently, reporting to AERS is voluntary in the USA. Many health
experts estimate that only 1-5 percent of actual adverse effects get
reported. So, the Stanford study, while laudable considering it’s from
within the medical monopoly system, is based on AERS data that contains
a small fraction of actual adverse effects.
This excludes the vast numbers of vaccine related adverse effects and
the sad story of fluoroquinolone antibiotic victims who were prescribed
Ciprofloxacin (Cipro), Levaquin, Avelox, or Tequin.If you or someone you
know has suffered neurological and muscular disorders after using any of
the above antibiotics or other fluoroquinolone based drug or anesthesia,
here’s a support group site.
Dr. Russell Blaylock, author of Health And Nutrition Secrets That Can
Save Your Life once explained that doctors don’t report adverse
reactions to AERS because they don’t want to be associated with causing
harm or imply culpability.
Apparently, even though doctors are protected by the “standard of
care” principle that protects them from from liability for using AMA
approved applications and FDA approved drugs, most prefer denial to
rocking the boat and potentially jeopardising their medical careers.
Remove the mainstream medicine’s monopoly
Funding for trials is provided by pharmaceutical companies who pay
the FDA for their approval.
Besides being an easily corruptible system, it keeps out the real
innovators who lack the funds for bringing their remedies or techniques
into acceptance.
Minor kudos to the Stanford team because their efforts were aimed
only at improving synthetic drug pharmacology.
Naturally, the conspicuous negative statistics were ignored by the
media the same way Dr. Stanfield’s report was.
In a saner world, it would be better to simply enforce anti-trust
laws to the medical monopoly, if there are still any enforceable
anti-trust laws in the books.
That would allow “alternative” (real) medicine to come to the
forefront.
- Third World Network Features
|