To your health

[colemj]

Originally Posted by d0ug

I know it is not the AMA, FDA. these are tools used by others.
The Drug Story by Morris Bealle

Good grief, you DO believe this is a "Mason-type" conspiracy! Really? The Rockefeller Center controls all medical research, drug approval and usage in the entire world? And they have operatives in all of the highest offices and agencies of the worlds governments? And have "hit men" and special ops teams doing the ground work to keep this all quiet and controlled?

Definitely tin hat time here.

Mark

[colemj]

Originally Posted by d0ug

Please do a search with the words Bayer aids and see what you find.
even Bayer admitted it after it was proven

OK, I did the search and learned something. But not from the many pages of conspiracy theories that search will bring up. I read the wikipedia article.

The contaminated drug in question was a treatment for hemophilia produced in the 70's and early 80's.

AIDS was not identified as an illness until the early to mid 80's, and the causative agent not identified until after that, so up until around 1982-1983, the companies producing this drug had no way of knowing that the AIDS virus was being passed in their drug.

The concern was about viral hepatitis being passed along. The drug companies took blood donations from places that allowed drug users, prisoners and other high-risk groups to give blood for money. However, since there was a test for viral hepatitis, their thought was that any blood that contained it could be dropped from the supply used for producing the medicine. They should not have done this for hepatitis reasons, but at this point they are completely innocent of intentionally passing on the AIDS virus.

In the early 80's, people started getting sick and no one knew why. However, there was a link back to hemophiliacs and the drugs used to treat them. The world regulatory bodies then approved a heat treatment for the drug to kill the AIDS virus (historically, they had still not yet discovered the virus, but knew that heat treated drugs did not pass along the illness).

In 1984, one single company had a stock of the old drug and decided to sell it to Hong Kong and an unidentified Latin American country. They were very wrong to do so, and this may have been illegal (it was definitely unethical - the decision by all companies to withdraw the non-heat treated supply was voluntary, but this one company was the only one not to do so).

The FDA tried to keep the news from the public. This was also, in hindsight, unethical. I say "in hindsight" because I was involved in the medical field at that time and the panic around AIDS was very high because no one knew what caused it, who were vulnerable, how it was caught, how large an epidemic might be and how fast it would spread. People were refusing to have any personal contact with others, and anyone catching the sniffles was shunned. Politicians were blaming everything and everyone, and don't get me started on what the religious nuts were saying.

The whole thing was over by 1985 and the period contained exactly two years in which the one company knew that something was wrong with their treatment, but did not know at the time exactly what.

I am not in any way defending the drug company or the FDA in this. As I stated, I think they acted unethically. However, let's put this in perspective:

You originally stated that the drug companies are intentionally giving children AIDS to profit off the treatment. You implied that this is on-going and wide-based.

Only by the largest stretch of the imagination could one even say that a single company allowed hemophilic children in Hong Kong and an unidentified Latin America country to get AIDS through a contaminated product, that this company did not have an AIDS treatment to profit from, and that this is a historic issue and not a current practice.

I'm sure you think that wikipedia is also controlled by the Rockefellers and that the real information is contained in those many pages of conspiracy theories.

Mark

[witzgall]

Doug,
The truth is, either you are right, or you are wrong. Obviously, you believe that you are correct in your beliefs, conspiracy theories etc. But...

What if you are not? There are many, many very smart people out there every day getting it wrong. Imagine for a moment that the truth is not what you think it is. That you are in fact not smarter (or better informed) than most of the people of the civilized world.

Now, imagine how your life might change for the better if you changed your viewpoints on these matters, knowing that they were incorrect. You might be surprised at how positive an impact it could be on your daily existence.

Chris

[Blue Crab]

Nice post. Makes sense. Mature. Thank you.

[d0ug]

Very nicely put Chris. Well I did not want to get onto personal things but here it goes. Four years ago would have agreed with the majority on this thread but something happen. Was 66 years old 50 lbs over weight on high blood pressure medicine which doctor said I would need to take all my life. I was scheduled surgery and 4 more surgeries plan for the future. When I walk out of the doctor’s office frustrated told my wife there must be another way.
Did my home work and found an answer. I now 70 years old 50 lbs lighter blood pressure 114/68 did not have any surgeries. All blood test are very good. Even re grown hair that age took away.
I am not selling anything or even promoting anything only asking that they think there might be another way. Hoping that they don’t reach the same state that I found myself in before they look

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by GaryMayo

Doug is correct about suppressed cancer treatments.

The rest of you scoffers, when your wife or mother, has had several mammograms, that will cause/ develop lumps, and then some doctor with an AMA pen in his pocket, will be sending you a bill for 47,000 for removing her breasts. Not counting the other doctor bills, and hospital bill.

I am sorry to see so many indoctrinated sheepel here. Would think the sailboat people would be into digging a bit deeper.

The tin foil hat crack was a nice touch. Folks that resort to name calling and such as a way to discredit others, only discredit themselves.

My wife and I cured her stage four cancer of the breasts 13 years ago. Doctors sent her a registered letter saying she would be dead in four months, unless they continued treatment on her. Truth is, she would be dead had we let the poison vipers lay a hand on her.

The paper always lists the cause of death the illness being treated. BS. People being treated for cancer, never die from cancer, they die from chemotherapy, they die from radation, and they die from surgery.

Diet, fresh air, exercise, vitamins, minerals, clean water, and a complete absence of internal medicine doctors is the key to a long happy life.

The average age of an AMA doctor at his funeral is 58 years old. Why? He listened to his AMA buddies and got the flu shots, got the inoculations, got the bottles of bloodpresure medicine, got the root canals, drank the fluoride water,

I have done my homework, and my wife and I shun doctors like the plague.

A person needs over 90 minerals in their diet to stay healthy. The average person get less than ten and you are doing better than most to get 15.

Find a fella named Dr Joel Wallach who wrote a book called Dead Doctors Don't Lie. Study the life of Rennie Casie.

If a person has a blood that runs a little alkaline, they rarely if ever get sick. Most people have acid leaning blood, and acid saliva. That is easy to remedy, and costs almost nothing. Maybe two dollars a week.

Why would the AMA want well people at the cost of two dollars a week? Can't build cancer wings on hospitals doing that, now can we.

I know a number of people who have died of breast cancer, but not from the treatment for it. I would do it all again and more if it had been available. I'm six years out from treatment and they ("they" being solid research) continue to come up with things I can do to improve my odds.

I'm very glad your wife survived. If I had been Stage IV I would have turned to alternatives also. The letter sounds strange. I know of no standard therapy (and I have reason to be very familiar with them) for Stage IV cancer from mainstream medicine that does anything except extend life for a matter of months -- not even a year. I knew a woman who had liver cancer and a daughter in college. It was Stage IV but treatment allowed her to see her daughter graduate from college. She died that summer, however.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by GaryMayo

All truth passes through three stages.

First, it is ridiculed.

Second, it is violently opposed.

Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.



Attachment 49563

All (science) fiction goes through the first two stages.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by DeepFrz

All I know and can add to this thread is that the doctor (Australian) fought for 12 yrs before the AMA would publish his work on stomach ulcers. He had proven that stomach ulcers are caused by bacteria and not acid and could be treated with a 3 wk. course of antibiotics instead of taking gastric medication for years and/or undergoing major surgery.

I'm not sure it's completely accepted yet.

This is one reason to get a second opinion on surgeries, too. When they first came up with a way to remove the gallbladder through the belly button, it was fought by surgeons familiar with the older way. The older way was terribly invasive -- and painful -- surgery that required a long recovery and had a much higher rate of complications, but people tend to stick to what they're familiar with (we've certainly seen that here on other topics!)

A friend who is a doctor explained to me that the internal organs -- liver, etc. -- are not used to being touched (probably fairly vigorously as they're ... moved out of the way) and react with much greater pain than, say, a cut to the skin. The body knows nothing should be touching its internal organs. He said that added significantly to the pain.

If you get a second opinion, someone affiliated with a different hospital, you're more likely to find someone with a different perspective. Maybe the first one was the best one, but then again, maybe not. You have to find out for yourself.

[Rakuflames]

[QUOTE=d0ug;1081718]

As soon as I read insulting words about me such as "indroctinated sheeple" I stop reading, because I know that person does not have a strong argument, or he/she would not resort to such harsh words. When a post OPENS with that, sometimes I just put the person on filter.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by colemj

The AMA is only a single organization with a publishing branch. The two Australian doctors (there were two of them) had many, many other journals they could have published in. However, those journals also were not interested in publishing until a controlled study had been performed and the bacterium isolated and identified and associated with the ulcers through at least a hypothetical mechanism.

The delay in publication was that the bacterium responsible for the ulcers was very difficult to culture and study and make a causative link to.

That is the way science is done and published. The doctors at no time "fought" the AMA or any other organization - they simply worked hard for many years to get the scientific data required to publish in scientific journals. Those two doctors were awarded a Nobel Prize for their work - not shunned, discredited or covered up. They are, and always were, considered good scientists.

This example simply is not supportive of the OP's thesis.

Mark

It's "science by sound byte." Real research, like legal documents, is harder to read than most people realize. The media almost always get it wrong. I still hear people like "Dr. Oz" stating on TV that stress causes ulcers. Maybe it does sometimes, but I certainly would try a round of antibiotics first. But fans of alternatives are often opposed to them.

I know someone who really needed to have a heart valve replaced. As he balked, they put him on medications to help support his heart function. He decided he knew better than the MD's, that they were all "indoctrinated sheeple" (he used that term; it's "in" among some), stopped taking his meds and started walking 2 - 3 miles every day. He lost a few extra pounds. Took a lot of vitamins.

Sounds good, right?

Well, no -- not this time. The walking stressed an already compromised heart, and he was in heart failure by the time he had the surgery. He didn't make his heart stronger with that walking -- he made it weaker.

[d0ug]

For all the people who participated thank you. I made this post not to win friends if I wanted that I would have posted things you all agree with and hope I did not made too many enemies. For those people who agreed with me you have done some home work. The people who checked out what I put up very good. Then disagree at lease you willing to check things out. The people who disagreed with out checking I only hope that if does not take a life threatening situation to ask could there be an other way. To all the people I hope you all live many years and are very healthy.

[lateral]

Question:
If the pharma's are not alowed to promote off label, then why are they allowed to gift
doctors? Or are all the gifts to doctors a fallacy?

[colemj]

Originally Posted by lateral

Question:
If the pharma's are not alowed to promote off label, then why are they allowed to gift
doctors? Or are all the gifts to doctors a fallacy?

The FDA does not control the relationship between pharma and physicians beyond the rules of how a drug can be approved, used and marketed. Promoting off-label usage falls within this control.

Mostly, public outcry and threat of congressional regulation has removed the "gifting" now - which was almost solely in the form of junket vacations in the guise of "conferences", rather than Porsches and Rolex watches.

Pharma still hands out lots of branded pens, paper pads, etc, though.

Mark