Showing posts with label Medicine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Medicine. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 31, 2021

“Biggest Health Scam of the 21st Century.” Report by 1500 Health Professionals


Global Research   February 25, 2021

“We are health professionals of the international collective : United Health Professionals, composed of more than 1,500 members (including professors of medicine, intensive care physicians and infectious disease specialists) from different countries of Europe, Africa, America, Asia and Oceania and, on August 26, 2020, we addressed to governments and citizens of countries around the world an alert message regarding the COVID outbreak.

We say : STOP to all crazy and disproportionate measures that have been taken since the beginning to fight SARS-CoV-2 (lockdown, blocking the economy and education, social distancing, wearing of masks for all, etc.) because they are totally unjustified, are not based on any scientific evidence and violate the basic principles of evidence-based medicine.

On February 4, 2021, United Health Professionals sent a followup report to national governments entitled:

International Alert Message about COVID-19. United Health Professionals  

Neither the August report nor the more recent February report have been the object of media coverage.  

The earlier UHP August 28, 2020 report (which was also submitted to national governments) laid the groundwork for the February 2021 report. 

***

The August 2020 report is entitled:

STOP the Terror, Madness, Manipulation, Dictatorship, Lies and the Biggest Health Scam of the 21 st Century, 

Monday, November 30, 2020

The truth about the Nuremberg Code and the protection it provides us from accepting any forced medical procedure or therapy at all.

Doctors Trial Nuremberg Code

Paul Stramer  November 30, 2020

Some people might not be familiar with the verb "to dissemble", but we all need to become familiar with it, because there is a lot of dissembling going on.

It basically means to deliberately conceal something or obfuscate it, so that one's attention is misdirected or deflected from whatever the Dissembler wishes to obscure. Like the truth. And in this case, the truth about the Nuremberg Code and the protection it provides us from accepting any forced medical procedure or therapy at all.

Together with casting doubts and slander, dissembling is one of the chief tools in the propagandist toolbox.

A few days ago, I wrote an article explaining that forced vaccinations are a violation of the Nuremberg Code. Note the word, "forced". In fact, any forced medical procedure or therapy is against the Nuremberg Code.

All medical procedures and therapies must have fully informed and freely given consent, to the greatest extent possible - which means that people who are conscious and able to decide things for themselves remain in control of their medical destiny.

It's only when you are in desperate straits and unconscious that medical professionals are allowed to step in and make decisions "for you". 

 

This is all cut and dried and set in cement since the 1940's, but now, we have people trying to dissemble it and water it down and reinterpret the Nuremberg Code as applying only to medical experimentation.  

Not. 

The Code itself explains exactly what it applies to, and even though the cases giving rise to the Code arose from medical experiments in Concentration Camps and involved forced medical experimentation on unwilling subjects, the core of the Nuremberg Code rose to the occasion and outlawed all kinds of forced medical procedures and therapies. Not just experimental procedures.  Not just experimental therapies. 

Any medical procedure or therapy that you don't want to participate in, you have the full, free, and unprejudiced right to refuse.  Period.  

Go back and read Article 6, Sections 1 and 3, of the Nuremberg Code for yourselves. 

Don't take anyone else's word for it.  Not even mine.  Be sure.  And make good use of the information if anyone comes to your door with a needle in hand. 

Another good one to quote in their faces is their own cherished Roe vs. Wade decision, the excuse for allowing abortion on demand.  My body.  My choice.  That applies to every aspect of your body, what you take out and what you put into it, too.  

The same dissembling article draws attention to the fact that the Nuremberg Code doesn't make vaccination illegal.  Who said it did?  They are deliberately creating a False Argument as a means to obfuscate. 

The Nuremberg Code makes FORCED vaccination illegal---along with all other forced medical procedures and therapies.  The Nuremberg Code doesn't single out vaccinations or any other procedure or therapy --- it outlaws all forced procedures and therapies with the same broad brush.  

So if you want to be vaccinated, after being fully informed of all the possible downsides and consequences, after understanding exactly what the vaccine contains, after understanding that you will have extremely limited rights of recourse if you voluntarily take the injection and something goes wrong---- then you are free to take your chances and do as you will.  It's your choice.  

The Nuremberg Code won't protect you from your own fully disclosed consent. 

But it will protect you from being imposed upon by politicians and "private security forces" hired by banks that are colluding in this scheme to defraud America under color of law.  

The Nuremberg Code gives you full standing, if they attempt to violate it and force any kind of involuntary or undisclosed vaccination on you by any means---- whether by wrestling you to the ground or by threatening to deprive you of any other right or privilege, including the right to travel and use public facilities. 

All indications are that we are entering a very dark chapter in American history. You will need to stay alert and stay informed, and you are not being given straight information from any of the commercial media channels or their acolytes and paid trolls.  You need to read things with a critical eye and be able to discern the tricks the propagandists employ.  

I am posting (below) an example of a dissembling "News" article so that you can see exactly how they dissemble the actual important information and misrepresent it to mean something else: https://www.boomlive.in/world/do-vaccinations-violate-human-rights-under-the-nuremberg-code-8308

Now read the actual Nuremberg Code Sections --- Article 6, Sections 1 and 3. 

Monday, August 31, 2020

Only one in ten medical treatments are backed by high-quality evidence

The conversation September 2, 2020

When you visit your doctor, you might assume that the treatment they prescribe has solid evidence to back it up. But you'd be wrong. Only one in ten medical treatments are supported by high-quality evidence, our latest research shows.

The analysis, which is published in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, included 154 Cochrane systematic reviews published between 2015 and 2019. Only 15 (9.9%) had high-quality evidence according to the gold-standard method for determining whether they provide high or low-quality evidence, called GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation). Among these, only two had statistically significant results - meaning that the results were unlikely to have arisen due to random error - and were believed by the review authors to be useful in clinical practice. Using the same system, 37% had moderate, 31% had low, and 22% had very low-quality evidence.

The GRADE system looks at things like risk of bias. For example, studies that are "blinded" - in which patients don't know whether they are getting the actual treatment or a placebo - offer higher-quality evidence than "unblinded" studies. Blinding is important because people who know what treatment they are getting can experience greater placebo effects than those who do not know what treatment they are getting.

Tuesday, December 17, 2019

Top medical journal takes on big pharma

SMH. December 4, 2019
A leading medical journal is launching a global campaign to separate medicine from big pharma, linking industry influence to the pelvic mesh scandal that injured hundreds of women.
The BMJ says doctors are being unduly influenced by industry-sponsored education events and industry-funded trials for major drugs.

Those trials cannot be trusted, the journal's editor and a team of global healthcare leaders write in a scathing editorial published on Wednesday.

The "endemic financial entanglement with industry is distorting the production and use of healthcare evidence, causing harm to individuals and waste for health systems", they write.

They are calling for governments to start funding independent trials of new drugs and medical devices, rather than relying on industry-funded studies. Sponsored research is more likely to find a favourable result compared to independent research, studies show.

Saturday, November 30, 2019

What if your doctor failed to talk to you about the most important threat to your health?

What if your doctor failed to talk to you about the most important threat to your health? Wouldn’t you worry about the quality of your health care? Poor quality diet is a leading cause of death in the United States, but it is unlikely that your doctor has the knowledge to even begin a meaningful conversation about your nutrition or to make an appropriate dietary referral.  

Most doctors lack the knowledge necessary to offer nutrition advice to patients; indeed, fewer than 14 percent of physicians report feeling equipped to advise on diet or the connection between food and health. This is unsurprising given that, for example, 90 percent of cardiologists in a recent survey reported receiving minimal or no instruction on nutrition during medical training. 

Yet it is also concerning. Obesity, type-2 diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and stroke, which are leading causes of death in the United States, all are closely linked to diet and nutrition. 

Nearly 40 percent of adults and 18 percent of children are obese, and these numbers are increasing; almost 10 percent of Americans suffer from diabetes, compared with less than 1 percent just 50 years ago. Even more concerning, more than one-third of Americans have pre-diabetes. 

A focus on treatment rather than prevention has led to medical education that ignores the central role that food plays in health. The average U.S. medical school devotes less than 1 percent of total lecture hours to nutrition. Accreditation requirements for medical residencies and fellowships do not include nutrition. 

The standardized exams that medical students must pass to become board certified lack questions that test the ability to advise patients on diet. And to date, no state requires continuing medical education in nutrition or diet-related disease as part of the ongoing education for physicians to maintain licensure. 

This dangerous gap in their education means that doctors do not learn the basic guidance in the U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, or stay apprised of the latest nutrition science. Accordingly, they fail to recognize, and are unable to convey to patients, the importance of diet to health. This means fewer referrals to nutritionists, even when diet plays a vital role in their patient’s health.

The lack of nutrition education during medical training is also a costly mistake. Health-care spending has skyrocketed — Medicare benefit payments exceeded $730 billion in 2018 and account for nearly 15 percent of all federal spending.

Saturday, August 31, 2019

Google vanishing alternative medicine content

August 25th 2019 Greenmed
With about 1 billion health searches happening on Google every day, it's not hard to understand why censoring natural health information serves a multitude of interests, not the least of which is Big Pharma's bottom line.

new analysis released by Bob Troia, Twitter handle Quantified Bob, reveals how health sites have been decimated by Google in the period tracked from April 15th, 2018 to August 15th, 2019.

He posted the following graphic on Twitter on August 25th, 2019, showing as high as a 99.87% decrease in visibility through Google search results, and a 81.14% drop for Greenmedinfo.com. 

Mayo Clinic and WebMD, on the other hand, saw a 59.98% and 30.71% increase, respectively. The difference in treatment between natural and conventional health websites has lead many to speculate that this was a manually executed penalty targeting the alternative medicine space. One of our colleagues, a Google SEO expert, posted his opinion on the matter here: “Google Takes Position in Controversial Vaccine Safety Debate.”  Be forewarned, the rabbit hole goes deep. Google’s motivations and bias stretch all the way to election manipulation, as we discuss here: "Google Just Scrubbed Natural Health Websites From Its Search Results; Whistleblower Explains How and Why."

However, you don’t have to fall into the stereotypes of a health freedom advocate, vaccine choice, or natural health obsessed organization to feel the pain of Google’s purge. Examine.com, for instance, which prides itself on being entirely science-based, and who has written about how “you do not need to worry about MSG,” “Curcumin is not a panacea,” and “Diet soda is unlikely to hurt your health,” also got hit hard. The founder recently wrote an article to answer the question: “Why has Examine.com disappeared from search results?” He and his organization played by Google’s rules, yet have all but disappeared from the search results. The same happened to Joe Cohen, founder of Self-Hacked, who wrote an excellent article on the subject here: “Google Is Taking Censorship of Health Websites to The Next Level.”

Friday, January 25, 2019

America’s Health Care System Has Become One Of The World’s Largest Money Making Scams


 
The Economic Collapse
If the U.S. health care system was a country, it would have the fifth largest GDP on the entire planet.  At this point only the United States, China, Japan and Germany have a GDP that is larger than the 3.5 trillion dollar U.S. health care market.  If that sounds obscene to you, that is because it is obscene.  We should want people to be attracted to the health care industry because they truly want to help people that are suffering, but instead the primary reason why people are drawn to the health care industry these days is because of the giant mountains of money that are being made.  Like so many other things in our society, the health care industry is all about the pursuit of the almighty dollar, and that is just wrong.
In order to keep this giant money machine rolling, the health care industry has to do an enormous amount of marketing.  If you can believe it, a study that was just published found that at least 30 billion dollars a year is spent on such marketing.
Hoping to earn its share of the $3.5 trillion health care market, the medical industry is pouring more money than ever into advertising its products — from high-priced prescriptions to do-it-yourself genetic tests and unapproved stem cell treatments.
Spending on health care marketing nearly doubled from 1997 to 2016, soaring to at least $30 billion a year, according to a study published Tuesday in JAMA.
This marketing takes many different forms, but perhaps the most obnoxious are the television ads that are endlessly hawking various pharmaceutical drugs.  If you watch much television, you certainly can’t miss them.  They always show vibrant, smiling, healthy people participating in various outdoor activities on bright, sunny days, and the inference is that if you want to be like those people you should take their drugs.  And the phrase “ask your doctor” is usually near the end of every ad…

As a result of all those ads, millions of Americans rush out to their doctors to ask about drugs that they do not need for diseases that they do not have.
And on January 1st, dozens of pharmaceutical manufacturers hit Americans with another annual round of massive price increases.
But everyone will just keep taking those drugs, because that is what the doctors are telling them to do.  But what most people never find out is that the pharmaceutical industry goes to great lengths to get those doctors to do what they want.  According to NBC News, the big drug companies are constantly “showering them with free food, drinks and speaking fees, as well as paying for them to travel to conferences”.
It is a legal form of bribery, and it works.
When you go to most doctors, they will only have two solutions to whatever problem you have – drugs or surgery.
And since nobody really likes to get cut open, and since drugs are usually the far less expensive choice, they are usually the preferred option.
Of course if doctors get off the path and start trying to get cute by proposing alternative solutions, they can get in big trouble really fast

Saturday, May 20, 2017

When Evidence Says No, But Doctors Say Yes

The primary-care physician suggested a different kind of angiogram, one that did not require a catheter but instead used multiple x-rays to image arteries. That test revealed an artery that was partially blocked by plaque, and though the man’s heart was pumping blood normally, the test was incapable of determining whether the blockage was dangerous. Still, his primary-care doctor, like the cardiologist at the emergency room, suggested that the executive have an angiogram with a catheter, likely followed by a procedure to implant a stent. The man set up an appointment with the cardiologist he was referred to for the catheterization, but when he tried to contact that doctor directly ahead of time, he was told the doctor wouldn’t be available prior to the procedure. And so the executive sought yet another opinion. That’s when he found Dr. David L. Brown, a professor in the cardiovascular division of the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. The executive told Brown that he’d felt pressured by the previous doctors and wanted more information. He was willing to try all manner of noninvasive treatments — from a strict diet to retiring from his stressful job — before having a stent implanted.

The executive had been very smart to seek more information, and now, by coming to Brown, he was very lucky, too. Brown is part of the RightCare Alliance, a collaboration between health-care professionals and community groups that seeks to counter a trend: increasing medical costs without increasing patient benefits. As Brown put it, RightCare is “bringing medicine back into balance, where everybody gets the treatment they need, and nobody gets the treatment they don’t need.” And the stent procedure was a classic example of the latter. In 2012, Brown had coauthored a paper that examined every randomized clinical trial that compared stent implantation with more conservative forms of treatment, and he found that stents for stable patients prevent zero heart attacks and extend the lives of patients a grand total of not at all. In general, Brown says, “nobody that’s not having a heart attack needs a stent.” (Brown added that stents may improve chest pain in some patients, albeit fleetingly.) Nonetheless, hundreds of thousands of stable patients receive stents annually, and one in 50 will suffer a serious complication or die as a result of the implantation procedure.      Read More

Monday, June 6, 2016

Medicine That Kills



Posted on June 1, 2016 by Jason in Gary Null Show, Health Care, Media
American science and public health is the finest in the world, with the smartest people working with the latest technologies to prevent and cure disease. We are exceptional.
That is a common belief held by several million people working within the medical industrial complex. The problem is, it’s untrue. In fact, it’s just the opposite.  American medicine kills more people unnecessarily than any other national medical system in the industrialized world. As Harvard School of Medicine professor Lucian Leape noted, American medicine kills 3 jumbo jets-worth of patients every 48 hours.(1)
In this series we review the startling science which suggests that deaths from medical error in the US may be conservatively estimated at 400,000 annually, while severe injuries from medical error may top 10,000,000.(2,3)  This equates to 8 million deaths and 200,000,000 severe injuries due to modern medical medicine during the past twenty years. It is higher than the casualties from any single conflict or war in American history.
American citizens should be alarmed that no federal effort is being made to prevent or reverse this growing trend.  What does this reveal about the medical establishment today?  What does it tell us about the level of training and competency of numerous qualified physicians, nurses, dentists, nutritionists, hospitals and scientists?  And more so, what can be said about the integrity of pharmaceutical companies, the federal health agencies and their thousands of employees that keep the medical machine running? And then what about the roles of mainstream media, universities and professional institutions and foundations and the so-called medical experts who are supposed to represent the highest standards of scientific ethics? Finally, what can be said about the tens of millions of Americans who are complacent and buy into this all-pervading establishment?
In retrospect, the nation suffers from severe cognitive dissonance and lives in denial about health standards and disease. American medicine feeds upon corruption, greed, malfeasance and self-serving interests. However, many prominent, respected medical voices have identified these problems and spoken out against them. This group includes Harvard professor and former editor of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine Dr. Marcia Angell, former FDA Associate Director for Science and Medicine Dr. David Graham and the CDC’s senior epidemiologist Dr. William Thompson.
For decades independent journalists have exposed the impropriety of the medical industrial complex. Here is a list of just some of the groundbreaking independent investigative reporting exposing the corruption of mainstream medicine:
Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare- by Peter C. Gøtzsche,
The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It by Marcia Angell MD
Prozac Nation by Elizabeth Wurtzel
Pharmageddon by David Healy
Doctors Are Gods: Corruption and Unethical Practices in the Medical Profession by David Jacobsen
The Big Fix: How the Pharmaceutical Industry Rips Off American Consumers by Katharine Greider
Overdosed America by John Abramson
Mad in America By Robert Whitaker
Betrayal of Trust : The Collapse of Global Public Health by Laurie Garret
I’m Dancing as Fast as I Can by Barbara Gordon
Racketeering in Medicine: The Suppression of Alternatives  by James Carter
Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre
White Coat, Black Hat: Adventures on the Dark Side of Medicine by Carl Elliot
These authors may be opinion leaders but they are not policymakers. Policymakers are so firmly in embedded into medicine’s controlled establishment that they are able to withstand the exposés and whistleblowers who bring their negligence and failures to public attention. Negative media, scandals, crimes of science don’t injure their careers nor their professional standings.
There are many hundreds of original in-depth investigative reports, including my own Death by Medicine, which required over 5 years of intensive research by five physicians and doctorates. I have released many award-winning documentaries such as Death by Medicine, War on Health, Prescription for Disaster, Silent Epidemic, Autism: Made in the USA and others. Yet what is the cumulative impact of all this investigative reporting upon current federal health policies and regulation? ZERO.
The US spends more money on domestic healthcare than any other country in the world. Grants and funding have been funnelled to millions of people, including over 900,000 physicians and nurses, hundreds of hospitals, pharmaceutical and medical technology companies, but the end-product is never thoroughly reviewed and assessed for viable success. Therefore, what incentive is provided to institute change if only medical failures are rewarded?
Has anyone ever heard of a physician or hospital refunding a patient’s care after medical error resulted in his or her death? And yet the public and media have the temerity to praise this medical paradigm’s leaders as heroes who are fighting the good fight against cancer, or AIDS or Alzheimer’s and diabetes, without ever questioning whether or not the entire paradigm might be flawed?
Unfortunately today’s medical establishment and its leaders won’t change. It’s too large to change.  There are too many vested interests and capitalizing on projected revenues is too entrenched into the system’s modus operandi. However, this doesn’t mean that we as individuals cannot change. Harvard Medical School’s Marcia Angell observed,
“Similar conflicts of interest and biases exist in virtually every field of medicine, particularly those that rely heavily on drugs or devices. It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
“The United States is the only advanced country that permits the pharmaceutical industry to charge exactly what the market will bear, whatever it wants”
“The pharmaceutical industry likes to depict itself as a research-based industry, as the source of innovative drugs. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is their incredible PR and their nerve.”
In January 2016 federal multidistrict litigation commenced against Pfizer over its hugely popular cholesterol-lowering drug, Lipitor. After a 2012 study found the statin drug increased type 2 diabetes risks by 50 percent among postmenopausal women, Pfizer stands accused of not providing adequate warning about Lipitor’s life-threatening adverse effects.(4)  Thousands of personal injury lawsuits have been filed across the country by patients alleging they were harmed by the drug.
Lipitor was launched in 1996 and is the most successful medication in pharmaceutical history with sales over $131 billion. Predictably, financial settlements from the lawsuits will amount to a pittance of the drug’s overall revenues.
Pfizer has knowingly put millions of patients’ health and lives at risk; nevertheless, following a settlement Pfizer’s business returned to normal.  Nothing fundamentally changed and the corporation’s revenues simply increased. Since the revelation of the diabetes link, the company has continued to earn billions on Lipitor sales and no one is being held accountable.  More egregious is that nobody in the mainstream media speaks about the numerous scandals that plague the medical-industrial complex and its consistent bottom line to prioritize profit over health.
There is a serious emergency when federal regulatory agencies continue to approve medications, drugs and vaccines with numerous harmful and sometimes lethal side effects. Increasingly the FDA and CDC act as their own critics. Neither is the government blind to its own deficiencies in healthcare delivery. The Institute of Medicine (IOM), a part of the United States National Academy of Sciences, states:
“Healthcare in the United States is not as safe as it should be. . . . Among the problems that commonly occur during the course of providing healthcare are adverse drug events and improper transfusions, surgical injuries and wrong-site surgery, suicides, restraint- related injuries or death, falls, burns, pressure ulcers, and mistaken patient identities [all of which exact] their cost in human lives.” (5)
The IOM refers to “the nation’s epidemic of medical errors.” A large percent of these errors are related to adverse drug events (ADEs). An ADE is a broad term used to describe harm caused by medical intervention related to drugs, whereas an adverse drug reaction (ADR) involves injury caused by a medication prescribed at a normal dose. The FDA states that “ADRs are one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in healthcare.”(6) Dr. Curt Furburg published an article in the Archives of Internal Medicine proposing sweeping changes throughout the FDA.  Furburg and his colleagues write, “We see eight major problems with the current system of assessment and assurance of drug safety at the FDA.” A fundamental problem is the FDA’s initial review for drug approval that often fails to detect serious ADRs: “A study by the US General Accountability Office (GAO) concluded that 51% of all approved drugs had at least one serious ADR that was not recognized during the approval process.”(7)
Seeing the Bigger Picture
Until recently, public health researchers could cite only isolated statistics to make their case about the high risks of conventional medicine. No one had ever analyzed and compiled all the published literature dealing with injuries and deaths directly associated with federally protected medical practice.
Over a decade ago, several medical researchers and I spent years meticulously reviewing the statistical evidence regarding iatrogenic injury and death—that is, those conditions and deaths induced inadvertently by a physician or surgeon or by a medical treatment or diagnostic procedure. Our conclusions were shocking.
Our most stunning analysis was that the total number of deaths caused by conventional medicine is more than 700,000 per year, making the American medical system itself the leading cause of death and injury in the US. The statistics present a grim reality for the American patient. In contrast, the purported leading causes of death in the United States today, heart disease and cancer, are responsible for 611,105 and 584,881 annual deaths, respectively. (8)  But has there been any improvement in the last 10 years since our figures were revealed to the world? Hardly.
In 2013, John James, PhD. published an article in the Journal of Patient Safety examining the prevalence of iatrogenic death in America. James concluded that more than 400,000 patients die in hospitals each year due to preventable harm. (9) He also stated that “serious harm seems to be 10- to 20-fold more common than lethal harm.” (10) In other words, anywhere between 4 million and 8 million Americans are seriously harmed during hospital admissions annually.
In a recent 2016 report, co-authors Dr. Martin Makary and Dr. Michael Daniel at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine estimated that over 250,000 deaths occur each year due to modern medicine’s errors. (11) However, the authors concede that the actual figure is far greater because their statistics only account for hospital deaths and not outpatient or nursing home settings. During an interview, Dr. Makary pointed out that death certificates do not reflect medical error. (12) He went on to state that “Incidence rates for deaths directly attributable to medical care gone awry haven’t been recognized in any standardized method for collecting national statistics… The medical coding system was designed to maximize billing for physician services, not to collect national health statistics, as it is currently being used.” (13)
Since population studies on iatrogenic deaths are sorely inadequate, it is reasonable to project an accurate mortality rate that surpasses the 797,926 figure we arrived at over a decade ago. In addition, a 2010 study showed that the frequency of ADEs (fatal and otherwise) has steadily trended upwards over the past years.(14) Nor does research into medical errors in nursing homes reflect improvement in patient safety. A 2009 study found serious discrepancies in the administration of medications for nearly 3 out of 4 admissions in nursing facilities. (15) In another study that evaluated assisted living facilities in South Carolina, healthcare staff committed errors in the preparation and administration of medication over 40% of the time. (16)
Given these astounding figures, it’s only right to ask how is it possible that our regulatory agencies have failed to address our costly nationwide epidemic of medical errors. To begin our search for answers we will turn our attention to the FDA, its astonishingly shoddy science and disturbing corruption that plagues America’s leading federal health agency.
Blowing the Whistle on Bad Medicine: Dr. David Graham
We decided to publish this information to call attention to the failure of the American medical system. By exposing the gruesome statistics, a basis may be established that might encourage competent and compassionate medical professionals to recognize the inadequacies of today’s medical establishment and begin to institute progressive reforms. One such professional is Dr. David Graham, whose testimony before Congress provides an important context for our discussion.
On November 18, 2004, Dr. David Graham, a former Associate Director for Science and Medicine in the FDA’s Office of Drug Safety, testified before the US Senate. Dr. Graham graduated from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and trained in Internal Medicine at Yale and in adult Neurology at the University of Pennsylvania. (17)  His education and extensive experience qualify his expert opinion on the failures of pharmaceutical drugs.
Dr. Graham told the Senate:
During my career, I believe I have made a real difference for the cause of patient safety. My research and efforts within FDA led to the with- drawal from the US market of Omniflox, an antibiotic that caused hemolytic anemia; Rezulin, a diabetes drug that caused acute liver failure; Fen-Phen and Redux, weight loss drugs that caused heart valve injury; and PPA (phenylpropanolamine), an over- the-counter decongestant and weight loss product that caused hemorrhagic stroke in young women.
My research also led to the withdrawal from outpatient use of Trovan, an antibiotic that caused acute liver failure and death. I also contributed to the team effort that led to the withdrawal of Lotronex, a drug for irritable bowel syndrome that causes ischemic colitis; Baycol, a cholesterol-lowering drug that caused severe muscle injury, kidney failure and death; Seldane, an antihistamine that caused heart arrhythmias and death; and Propulsid, a drug for night-time heartburn that caused heart arrhythmias and death. . . .
I have done extensive work concerning the issue of pregnancy exposure to Accutane, a drug that is used to treat acne but can cause birth defects in some children who are exposed in utero if their mothers take the drug during the first trimester. During my career, I have recommended the market withdrawal of twelve drugs. Only two of these remain on the market today—Accutane and Arava, a drug for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis that I and a co-worker believe causes an unacceptably high risk of acute liver failure and death. (18)
The Los Angeles Times reported that witnesses told the Senate panel that Merck & Co. and the FDA knowingly had data well before the approval and licensure of Merck’s Vioxx® painkiller that proved the drug’s serious cardiovascular health risks. Nevertheless, the FDA granted it approval without resolving the risks, and Vioxx® was aggressively.(19)
Testifying about Merck’s Vioxx®, Dr. Graham states:
Today . . . you, we, are faced with what may be the single greatest drug safety catastrophe in the history of this country or the history of the world. We are talking about a catastrophe that I strongly believe could have, should have been largely or completely avoided. But it wasn’t, and over 100,000 Americans have paid dearly for this failure. In my opinion, the FDA has let the American people down, and sadly, betrayed a public trust. (20)
According to Dr. Graham. “Not only did the FDA ignore known risks from Vioxx® and related drugs but . . . it tried to prevent Graham and others from publicizing their own research that proved the extent of these risks.”(21)
Graham’s concerns were echoed by some members of Congress who heard his testimony. Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R–Iowa) said he was concerned that the FDA “has a relationship with drug companies that is too cozy.”(22)  Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D–New Mexico) said the problem was within the FDA’s own culture.“ This culture has been described as one whereby the pharmaceutical industry, which the FDA is mandated to regulate, is seen by the FDA as its client instead.(23)
In Graham’s view, drug safety problems began in 1992 with the passage of a law aimed at getting lifesaving drugs onto the market faster. In order to increase the FDA approval process, the law forced pharmaceutical companies to pay for most of the review process’ costs.  That left the FDA “captured by industry,” says Graham. “He who pays the piper calls the tune.” (24)
The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists reports that Graham testified “in February [2007] that, had it not been for the protection of Sen. Charles Grassley (R–Iowa), FDA would have fired him for publicly speaking out about his concerns about Vioxx® and other drugs.” (25)
Dr. Graham says, “ You need to weed the garden patch of drugs that aren’t doing what they’re supposed to do. The FDA has not been very good about that; it likes to cultivate all these weeds.”(26)  Dr. Graham “named five other drugs whose safety is suspect, and noted that ‘the FDA as currently configured is incapable of protecting America against another Vioxx®.’” (27) Many media sources present at the hearing, such as the Los Angeles Times and Medscape Medical News, (28) report that Graham then added, “ We are virtually defenseless,”(29)  but this sentence does not appear in the final transcript and may have been stricken from the record.
One report begins, “The American public is ‘virtually defenseless’ if another medication such as Vioxx® proves to be unsafe after it is approved for sale, a government drug safety reviewer told a congressional committee.”(30)
Medicine Today: As Dangerous as Ever
A decade has passed since Dr. Graham’s public statements exposing the dangerous bad science and corruption and that infests the FDA. It’s difficult to imagine that such public exposure hasn’t forced the agency to clean up its act, but the evidence clearly shows that our government health officials would rather support pharmaceutical profiteering than the health and safety and American citizens.
The FDA’s questionable operations were put under the spotlight in a 2015 article appearing in JAMA Internal Medicine titled “ Research Misconduct Identified by the US Food and Drug Administration Out of Sight, Out of Mind, Out of the Peer-Reviewed Literature,.” The article is a sobering assessment of the scale of scientific fraud and deception carried out by the FDA. Author Charles Seife of New York University examined the nature of the FDA’s inspection of various drug trials on human participants between 1998 and 2013.
The investigation’s results were stunning:
Fifty-seven published clinical trials were identified for which an FDA inspection of a trial site had found significant evidence of 1 or more of the following problems: falsification or submission of false information, 22 trials (39%); problems with adverse events reporting, 14 trials (25%); protocol violations, 42 trials (74%); inadequate or inaccurate recordkeeping, 35 trials (61%); failure to protect the safety of patients and/or issues with oversight or informed consent, 30 trials (53%); and violations not otherwise categorized, 20 trials (35%). Only 3 of the 78 publications (4%) that resulted from trials in which the FDA found significant violations mentioned the objectionable conditions or practices found during the inspection. No corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other comments acknowledging the key issues identified by the inspection were subsequently published. (31)
These disturbing data suggest that the FDA’s evaluation of pharmaceuticals for safety and efficacy may be so flawed that only 4% of all trial results are identified as such. As a result, FDA scientists and officials responsible for approving drugs to the market are kept largely uninformed about the egregious scientific misconduct involved in obtaining study data. Further, these erroneous and fraudulent studies are published in peer-reviewed scientific literature and accepted as valid science
Seife commented on the FDA’s staggering scientific impropriety in an article he composed for Slate:
RECORD 4 was one of four large clinical trials that involved thousands of patients who were recruited at scores of clinical sites in more than a dozen countries around the world. The trial was used as evidence that a new anti-blood-clotting agent, rivaroxaban, was safe and effective. The FDA inspected or had access to external audits of 16 of the RECORD 4 sites. The trial was a fiasco. At Dr. Craig Loucks’ site in Colorado, the FDA found falsified data. At Dr. Ricardo Esquivel’s site in Mexico, there was “systematic discarding of medical records” that made it impossible to tell whether the study drug was given to the patients. At half of the sites that drew FDA scrutiny—eight out of 16—there was misconduct, fraud, fishy behavior, or other practices so objectionable that the data had to be thrown out. The problems were so bad and so widespread that, contrary to its usual practice, the FDA declared the entire study to be “unreliable.” Yet if you look in the medical journals, the results from RECORD 4 sit quietly in The Lancet without any hint in the literature about falsification, misconduct, or chaos behind the scenes. This means that physicians around the world are basing life-and-death medical decisions on a study that the FDA knows is simply not credible. (32)
How are we supposed to have faith in a medical establishment that is responsible for the injury and death of thousands of Americans daily? How else does modern medicine exploit illness for profit and what lies at the root of this corrupt system? In the next article, we will uncover more about modern medicine’s deadly repercussions in the lives of millions of American people.
Endnotes:
  1. Leape, L. L. 1994. Error in medicine. JAMA, 272 (23):1851–7.
  2. James, John T. “A New, Evidence-based Estimate of Patient Harms Associated with Hospital Care.” Journal of Patient Safety 9, no. 3 (September 9, 2013): 122-28. Accessed May 9, 2016. doi:10.1097/pts.0b013e3182948a69.
  3. Cha, Ariana Eunjung. “Researchers: Medical Errors Now Third Leading Cause of Death in United States.” Washington Post. May 3, 2016. Accessed May 11, 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/05/03/researchers-medical-errors-now-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-united-states/.
  4. Culver AL, Ockene IS, Balasubramanian R, et al. Statin Use and Risk of Diabetes Mellitus in Postmenopausal Women in the Women’s Health Initiative. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(2):144-152. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.625.
  5. Institute of Medicine, US National Academy of Sciences. November 1999. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. http://www.iom. edu/Object.File/Master/4/117/ToErr-8pager. pdf (accessed January 25, 2009).
  6. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Preventable Adverse Drug Reactions: A Focus on Drug Interactions. Last updated July 31, 2002. http:// www.fda.gov/cder/drug/drugReactions/default. htm#ADRs:%20Prevalence%20and%20Inci- dence (accessed January 25, 2009).
  7. Furberg, C. D., A. A. Levin, P. A. Gross, R. S. Shapiro, and B. L. Strom. 2006. The FDA and drug safety: a proposal for sweeping changes. Arch Intern Med 166 (18):1938–42.
  8. Nichols, Hannah. “Public Health Heart Disease Cancer / Oncology Stroke The Top 10 Leading Causes of Death in the US.” Medical News Today. September 21, 2015. Accessed April 21, 2016. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/282929.php.
  9. James, John T. “A New, Evidence-based Estimate of Patient Harms Associated with Hospital Care.” Journal of Patient Safety 9, no. 3 (September 9, 2013): 122-28. Accessed May 9, 2016. doi:10.1097/pts.0b013e3182948a69.
  10. Ibid
  11. Makary MA, Daniel M. BMJ. 2016 May 3;353:i2139. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i2139.
  12. Johns Hopkins Medicine. “Medical errors now third leading cause of death in United States.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 4 May 2016. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/160504085309.htm>.
  13. Ibid
  14. Bourgeois, Florence T., Michael W. Shannon, Clarissa Valim, and Kenneth D. Mandl. “Adverse Drug Events in the Outpatient Setting: An 11-year National Analysis.” Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Pharmacoepidem. Drug Safe. 19, no. 9 (September 19, 2010): 901-10. doi:10.1002/pds.1984.
  15. Tjia, J., Bonner, A., Briesacher, B. A., McGee, S., Terrill, E., & Miller, K. (2009). Medication Discrepancies upon Hospital to Skilled Nursing Facility Transitions. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 24(5), 630–635. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-0948-2
  16. Zimmerman S ; Love K ; Sloane PD; et al. Medication administration errors in assisted living: scope, characteristics, and the importance of staff training. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011; 59: 1060-1068
  17. US Senate Finance Committee. Testimony of David J. Graham, MD, MPH, November 18, 2004. http://finance.senate.gov/hearings/ testimony/2004test/111804dgtest.pdf (accessed January 30, 2009).
  18. Ibid
  19. Alonso-Zaldivar, R., FDA Called ‘Defenseless’ Against Unsafe Drugs, Los Angeles Times, November 18, 2004. http://www.mcall.com/topic/ la-111804vioxx_lat,0,7473253.story (accessed January 31, 2009).
  20. US Senate Finance Committee. Testimony of David J. Graham, MD, MPH, November 18, 2004. http://finance.senate.gov/hearings/ testimony/2004test/111804dgtest.pdf (accessed January 30, 2009).
  21. National Coalition Against Censorship. FDA Suppressed Vioxx Studies Despite Evidence of Seri- ous Health Risks, November 25, 2004. http:// www.ncac.org/FDA_Suppressed_Vioxx_Studies (accessed January 30, 2009).
  22. Alonso-Zaldivar, R., “FDA Called ‘Defense- less’ Against Unsafe Drugs,” Los Angeles Times, November 18, 2004. http://www.mcall.com/ topic/la-111804vioxx_lat,0,7473253.story (accessed January 31, 2009).
  23. Ibid
  24. Yale Medicine. FDA’s top safety critic keeps a watchful eye on the public good, Summer 2005. References • 169 170 •Gary Null, PhD, et al. http://yalemedicine.yale.edu/ym_su05/faces. html (accessed January 31, 2009).
  25. Young, D., Safety Experts Call for Accountability from FDA, Drug Firms. American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, March 23, 2007. http://www.ashp.org/import/News/HealthSys- temPharmacyNews/newsarticle.aspx?id=2503 (accessed January 31, 2009).
  26. Loudon, Manette, interviewer. The FDA Exposed: An Interview With Dr. David Graham, the Vioxx Whistleblower, parts of this interview appear in Gary Null’s documentary film, Pre- scription for Disaster, Garynull.com, August 30, 2005, reprinted by Natural News. http://www. naturalnews.com/011401.html (accessed Janu- ary 31, 2009).
  27. US Senate Finance Committee. Testimony of David J. Graham, MD, MPH, November 18, 2004. http://finance.senate.gov/hearings/ testimony/2004test/111804dgtest.pdf (accessed January 30, 2009).
  28. Yale Medicine. FDA’s top safety critic keeps a watchful eye on the public good, Summer 2005. http://yalemedicine.yale.edu/ym_su05/faces. html (accessed January 31, 2009).
  29. Alonso-Zaldivar, R., FDA Called ‘Defense- less’ Against Unsafe Drugs, Los Angeles Times, November 18, 2004. http://www.mcall.com/ topic/la-111804vioxx_lat,0,7473253.story (accessed January 31, 2009).
  30. Kelly, J. Harsh criticism lobbed at FDA in Senate Vioxx hearing, Medscape Medical News, November 23, 2004. http://medgenmed.medscape. com/viewarticle/538021_print (accessed January 31, 2009).
  31. Seife C. Research Misconduct Identified by the US Food and Drug Administration: Out of Sight, Out of Mind, Out of the Peer-Reviewed Literature. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(4):567-577. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.7774.
  32. Seife, Charles. “The Food and Drug Administration Covers Up Evidence of Fraud, Fabrication, and Scientific Misconduct.” Slate Magazine. February 09, 2015. Accessed April 22, 2016. http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/02/fda_inspections_fraud_fabrication_and_scientific_misconduct_are_hidden_from.html.
Supplemental Statistics on Iatrogenic Death in the United States excerpted from Death By Medicine
As shown in Table 1, the estimated total number of iatrogenic deaths—that is, deaths induced inadvertently by a physician or surgeon or by medical treatment or diagnostic procedures—in the US annually is at least 581,926. It is evident that the American medical system is itself the leading cause of death and injury in the US. By comparison, approximately 652,091 Americans died of heart disease in 2005, while 559,312 died of cancer.(45) The mortality costs alone exceed $215 billion a year. “Healthcare costs in the United States are growing at an unsustainable rate,” according to former Senator Ron Wyden, who serves on the Senate’s Finance Committee, Subcommittee on Healthcare.(46)
The National Coalition on Healthcare reports that annual healthcare spending in the US has been increasing two to five times the rate of inflation since 2000.(47) In 2006, Americans spent more than $2.2 trillion on healthcare.(48) Total healthcare spending was $2.4 trillion in both 2007 and 2008, or $7,900 per person, which represented 17 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP).(70) That’s about 4.3 times the amount spent on national defense.(71) The total was projected to reach $3.1 trillion in 2012.(72) The National Coalition on Healthcare further states:It is estimated that we have spent as a nation nearly 16 trillion dollars on healthcare since 2000, but this expenditure has not resulted in demonstrably better quality of care or better patient satisfaction compared to other nations.(73)
Jason Lazarou, MSc, estimated 106,000 annual drug errors in his groundbreaking 1998 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association(74) the Institute of Medicine esti-
mated 98,000 annual medical errors. But if we use Dr. Lucian L. Leape’s 1997 medical and drug error rate of 3 million(75) multiplied by the 14% fatality rate he used in 1994,76 we find that the number of deaths would be increased by 216,000, for a total of 797,926 deaths annually as shown in Table 2.
References:
  1. Lazarou, J., B. H. Pomeranz, and P. N. Corey. 1998. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta- analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 279 (15):1200–5.
  2. Suh, D. C., B. S. Woodall, S. K. Shin, and E. R. Hermes-De Santis. 2000. Clinical and economic impact of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients. Ann Pharmacother 34 (12):1373–9.
  3. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Preventable Adverse Drug Reactions: A Focus on Drug Inter-
actions. Last updated July 31, 2002. http:// www.fda.gov/cder/drug/drugReactions/default. htm#ADRs:%20Prevalence%20and%20Inci- dence (accessed January 25, 2009).
  1. Institute of Medicine, US National Academy of Sciences. November 1999. To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System. http://www.iom. edu/Object.File/Master/4/117/ToErr8pager. pdf (accessed January 25, 2009).
  2. Thomas,E.J.,D.M.Studdert,H.R.Burstin,E. J. Orav, T. Zeena, E. J. Williams, K. M. Howard, P. C. Weiler, and T. A. Brennan. 2000. Incidence and types of adverse events and negligent care in Utah and Colorado. Med Care 38 (3):261–71.
  3. Thomas, E. J., D. M. Studdert, J. P. Newhouse, B. I. Zbar, K. M. Howard, E. J. Williams, and T. A. Brennan. 1999. Costs of medical injuries in Utah and Colorado. Inquiry 36 (3):255–64.
  4. Xakellis, G. C., R. Frantz, and A. Lewis. 1995. Cost of pressure ulcer prevention in long-term care. J Am Geriatr Soc 43 (5):496–501.
  5. Barczak, C. A., R. I. Barnett, E. J. Childs, and L. M. Bosley. 1997. Fourth national pressure ulcer prevalence survey. Adv Wound Care 10 (4):18–26.
57 Health Grades Quality Study, Patient Safety in American Hospitals, July 2004. http:// www.healthgrades.com/media/english/pdf/ hg_patient_safety_study_final.pdf (accessed March 3, 2009).
References • 175
176 •
Gary Null, PhD, et al.
  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Estimates of Healthcare-Associated Infections, last modified May 30, 2007. http://www.cdc. gov/ncidod/dhqp/hai.html (accessed January 24, 2009).
  2. Weinstein, R. A. 1998. Nosocomial infection update. Emerg Infect Dis 4 (3):416–20.
  3. Fourth Decennial International Conference on Nosocomial and Healthcare-Associated Infections. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. February 25, 2000, Vol. 49, No. 7, p. 138.
  4. Starfield, B. 2000. Is US health really the best in the world? JAMA 284 (4):483–5.
  5. Nursing Home Residents Dying of Hunger, Thirst. Consumer Affairs, November 29, 2004. http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/ nursing_home_neglect.html (accessed March 4, 2009).
  6. Starfield, B. 2000. Deficiencies in US medical care. JAMA 284 (17):2184–5.
  7. Weingart, S. N., L. Wilson R. Mc, R. W. Gibberd, and B. Harrison. 2000. Epidemiology of medical error. West J Med 172 (6):390–3.
  8. Siu, A. L., W. G. Manning, and B. Benjamin. 1990. Patient, provider and hospital characteristics associated with inappropriate hospitalization. Am J Public Health 80 (10):1253–6.
  9. Thomas, E. J., D. M. Studdert, J. P. Newhouse, B. I. Zbar, K. M. Howard, E. J. Williams, and T. A. Brennan. 1999. Costs of medical injuries in Utah and Colorado. Inquiry 36 (3):255–64.
  10. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/news/ ress/ pr2003/injurypr.htm. (Accessed May 22, 2006).
  11. Leape LL.Unnecessary surgery.Health Serv Res. 1989 Aug; 24(3):351–407.
  12. NationalCoalitiononHealthCare.HealthInsur- ance Costs: Facts on the Cost of Health Insurance and Health Care, NCHC, 2009. http:// www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml (accessed Jan- uary 28, 2009).
  13. NationalCoalitiononHealthCare.“DidYouKnow?” section of home page of NCHC, 2009. http://www. nchc.org/ (accessed January 27, 2009).
  14. National Coalition on Health Care. Health Insurance Costs: Facts on the Cost of Health Insurance and Health Care, NCHC, 2009. http://www.nchc. org/facts/cost.shtml (accessed January 28, 2009).
  15. NationalCoalitiononHealthCare.“DidYouKnow?” section of home page of NCHC, 2009. http://www. nchc.org/ (accessed January 27, 2009).
  16. Lazarou, J., B. H. Pomeranz, and P. N. Corey. 1998. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA 279 (15):1200–5.
  17. National Patient Safety Foundation. Nationwide poll on patient safety: 100 million Americans see medical mistakes directly touching them [press release]. McLean, VA: October 9, 1997.
  18. Leape, L. L. 1994. Error in medicine. JAMA 272 (23):1851–7.
  19. National Patient Safety Foundation. Nationwide poll on patient safety: 100 million Americans see
References • 177
78 • Gary Null, PhD, et al. medical mistakes directly touching them [press release]. McLean, VA: October 9, 1997.
  1. Ibid.
  2. Xakellis, G. C., R. Frantz, and A. Lewis. 1995. Cost of pressure ulcer prevention in long-term care. J Am Geriatr Soc 43 (5):496–501.
  3. Barczak, C. A., R. I. Barnett, E. J. Childs, and L. M. Bosley. 1997. Fourth national pressure ulcer prevalence survey. Adv Wound Care 10 (4):18–26.
  4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Estimates of Healthcare-Associated Infections, last modified May 30, 2007. http://www.cdc. gov/ncidod/dhqp/hai.html (accessed January 24, 2009).
  5. Health Grades Quality Study, Patient Safety in American Hospitals, July 2004. http://www. healthgrades.com/media/english/pdf/hg_ patient_safety_study_final.pdf (accessed March 3, 2009).
  6. Weinstein, R. A. 1998. Nosocomial infection update. Emerg Infect Dis 4 (3):416–20.
  7. Fourth Decennial International Conference on Nosocomial and Healthcare-Associated Infections. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. February 25, 2000, Vol. 49, No. 7, p. 138.
  8. Available at: http://www.cmwf.org/programs/ elders/burger_mal_386.asp. (accessed May 22, 2006).
  9. Starfield, B. 2000. Is US health really the best in the world? JAMA 284 (4):483–5.
  10. Starfield, B. 2000. Deficiencies in US medical care. JAMA 284 (17):2184–5.
  11. Weingart, S. N., L. Wilson R. Mc, R. W. Gibberd, and B. Harrison. 2000. Epidemiology of medical error. West J Med 172 (6):390–3.
  12. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/data/ hcup/ hcupnet.htm. (accessed May 22, 2006).
  13. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/news/ ress/ pr2003/injurypr.htm. (Accessed May 22, 2006).
  14. Leape LL.Unnecessary surgery. Health Serv Res. 1989 Aug;24(3):351–407.
  15. Peck, P. Patient safety requires fundamental changes to medical systems. Medscape Medi- cal News, 6 May 2004. http://www.medscape. com/viewarticle/475217 (accessed January 28, 2009).       PRN

Use of Term “FDA” Should Always Trigger a Warning

fda_approved
Posted on   By Jon Rappoport
“In 1957, the FDA burned all the books of dissident physician Wilhelm Reich, M.D., smashed his laboratory equipment with axes, and threw him in jail, where he died.”—Robert Anton Wilson, High Times, March 2001.
Unless you’ve been living in cave on a remote mountain, you know the FDA has been coming down harder on nutritional companies that publish health claims for their products. Such claims trigger investigations and harassment.
But you see, this arrangement is backwards.
The use of the term “FDA” should be the trigger for immediate investigation, whenever it appears. For example, “The FDA has ruled (name of drug) is safe and effective.” Boom. Probe.
Why? Obviously, the FDA is a rogue criminal organization, which is guilty of massive RICO felonies. That’s why.
A news story mentioning the FDA appears in a major newspaper? The paper, if it has an approximation of ethical concern, should print this:
Warning: any action attributed to the FDA should be considered criminal. Accepting an FDA opinion on something more serious than ‘H2O=water’ endangers life and limb. This news outlet accepts no responsibility for the health consequences of any FDA decision.
Now we’d be on the right track.
July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, Dr. Barbara Starfield, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, “Is US health really the best in the world?”: Medical drugs kill 106,000 Americans per year. That’s a million killings per decade.
Every one of the killer drugs is certified as safe and effective by the FDA, the Agency tasked with protecting the health of the American people.
Example: Vioxx was approved for use by the FDA on May 20, 1999. Eventually, it caused 88,000-140,000 cases of heart disease. Conservative death-toll number? 60,000. (An estimated 58,000 American troops died during the Vietnam War.)
Warning: If you accept the FDA’s advice on a health matter, you’re risking death. In case there is any confusion, death means death.
Did you just read a statement from the FDA? Your life is in imminent danger.
Perhaps you recall the original approval of GMO crops and their associated highly toxic Roundup pesticide? No? Let me summarize it for you.
When you cut through the verbiage, you arrive at two key statements. One from Monsanto and one from the FDA, the agency responsible for overseeing, licensing, and certifying new food varieties as safe.
Quoted in the New York Times Magazine (October 25, 1998, “Playing God in the Garden”), Philip Angell, Monsanto’s director of corporate communications, famously stated:
“Monsanto shouldn’t have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA’s job.”
From the Federal Register, Volume 57, No.104, “Statement of [FDA] Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties,” here is what the FDA had to say on this matter:
“Ultimately, it is the food producer who is responsible for assuring safety.”
The buck-passing, the direct and irreconcilable clash of these two statements, is no accident. It’s not a sign of incompetence or sloppy work or a mistake or a miscommunication. It’s a clear signal the fix was in.
Warning: The relationship of an FDA certification of safety to actual science is coincidental. Run for the hills.
In a stunning interview with Truthout’s Martha Rosenberg, former FDA drug reviewer, Ronald Kavanagh, exposed the FDA as a relentless criminal mafia protecting its client, Big Pharma, with a host of mob strategies (“Former FDA Reviewer Speaks Out About Intimidation, Retaliation and Marginalizing of Safety,” 7/29/2012).

Scientifically Proven Method to Reverse Diabetes (Ad)

Kavanagh: “…widespread racketeering, including witness tampering and witness retaliation.”
“I was threatened with prison.”
“One [FDA] manager threatened my children…I was afraid that I could be killed for talking to Congress and criminal investigators.”
Kavanagh reviewed new drug applications made to the FDA by pharmaceutical companies. He was one of the holdouts at the Agency who insisted the drugs had to be safe and effective before being released to the public.
But honest appraisal wasn’t part of the FDA culture, and Kavanagh swam against the tide, until he realized his life and the life of his children was on the line.
What was his secret task at the FDA? “Drug reviewers were clearly told not to question drug companies and that our job was to approve drugs.” In other words, rubber stamp them. Say the drugs were safe and effective when they were not.
Veterans of the Armed Forces, take note: Kavanagh remarks that the drug pyridostigmine, given to US troops to prevent the later effects of nerve gas, “actually increased the lethality” of certain nerve agents.
Kavanagh recalls being given records of safety data on a drug—and then his bosses told him which sections not to read. Obviously, they knew the drug was dangerous and they knew exactly where, in the reports, that fact would be revealed.
Warning: the FDA hammers into submission its own employees who are trying to protect your health. These employees submit, resign, or risk their lives and the lives of their families. Have a nice day.
Of course, the US Department of Justice takes no action against the FDA. Why would they?
In the government lexicon, killer medical drug equals safe and effective, whereas vitamin, mineral, herb equals H-bomb. Didn’t you know that?
Warning: FDA killers resemble ordinary citizens. They appear entirely normal. Their methods have advanced to the point where they can commit their deeds without brandishing visible weapons.
“—Hi, I’m from the FDA. Hey, why are you running away? I’m a public servant doing his job. Gosh o gee, I’m just like you.”
Yes, they can affect an entirely average presence. They internally censor remorse for their crimes. They commit those crimes while pretending to believe they’re carrying out important work. I don’t know why the CIA and DARPA keep researching more advanced forms of mind control. They merely need to study the FDA. That Agency has it down.
Warning: failing to heed warnings about the FDA is a symptom of advanced dementia.”     Natural Blaze

Thursday, May 12, 2016

Medical error is the third largest cause of death in the United States



Medical error is the third largest cause of death in the United States, according to an analysis published Wednesday in the medical journal BMJ.
In 2013, at least 250,000 people died not from the illnesses or injuries that prompted them to seek hospital care but from preventable mistakes, according to the study.
That number exceeds deaths from strokes and Alzheimer’s combined, and is topped only by heart disease and cancer, which each claim about 600,000 lives per year.

New legislation in the U.S. Congress may speed the arrival of new drugs, but will it leave citizens more exposed to dangerous drugs that have not been thoroughly tested? Julia Wilde examines how a drug moves through the FDA's approval process.

The death toll from medical mishaps would be even higher if nursing homes and out-patient care were included, the researchers found.
“People don’t just die from bacteria and heart plaque, they die from communication breakdowns, fragmented healthcare, diagnostic mistakes, and over-dosing,” said Martin Makary, a professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore and lead author of the study.
“Collectively, these represent the third leading cause of death in the United States,” he told AFP, adding that it is one of the most underreported endemics in global health.
A earlier study estimated the toll at between 250,000 and 440,000 per year.

Experts do not know the exact number of people who die from botched surgeries, faulty prescriptions, or a computer glitch simply because no one is keeping count.
Along with more than 100 other nations, the United States uses a system for collecting national health statistics — recommended by the World Health Organization — that does not keep track of medical errors.
“The absence of national data highlights the need for systematic measurement of the problem,” said Makary.
“Our study took the best science on the incidence of medical mistakes killing people in the delivery of care, and extrapolated that to the amount of care that we administer.”

- Death certificates -
The scope of the problem in the United States — which tops the world in per capita spending on health care — is probably about the same in other rich countries, he said.
As for the developing world, the situation is likely worse.
“I suspect that in Africa, poor quality medical care or preventable complications kill more people than HIV and malaria combined,” Makary said.
While it is not realistic to expect that human error can be eliminated in health care, protocols and “safety nets” can be put in place to track medical errors and reduce their number, the study concluded.

Death certificates, for example, could ask whether a preventable problem stemming from the patient’s medical care might have contributed to the death.
But asking hospitals and doctors to self-report their mistakes without offering a higher degree of protection from possible prosecution is a tall order, Makary acknowledged.
“It is difficult to create an open and honest conversation around the problem of people dying from the care that they have received,” he said.
Among other leading causes of death in the United States in 2013 were accidents (133,000), diabetes (76,500), influenza or pneumonia (55,000), and suicide (43,000), according to the National Center for Health Statistics.    Discovery