Category Archives: Medicine

Medical journal editor admits “science has taken a turn towards darkness”

COMMENT OF DR. RICHARD HORTON, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF OF THE LANCET

Dr. Frankenstein

The following commentary was published in Britain’s oldest and most prestigious medical journal, The Lancet, in April, 2015.


Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?

“A lot of what is published is incorrect.” I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take photographs of slides. Those who worked for government agencies pleaded that their comments especially remain unquoted, since the forthcoming UK election meant they were living in “purdah”—a chilling state where severe restrictions on freedom of speech are placed on anyone on the government’s payroll. Why the paranoid concern for secrecy and non-attribution? Because this symposium—on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research, held at the Wellcome Trust in London last week—touched on one of the most sensitive issues in science today: the idea that something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations.

The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Continue reading

Advertisements

In America today, medicine values profits over patient safety!

Although the following documentary was made in 2005, just bringing these facts forward did not solve the problem. In fact, it is much worse today, as anyone can discover when they look up their physicians on Dollars for Docs.

Patient’s right to informed dissent

MIGHT HAVE TO BE DECLARED . . . IN WRITING!

By AL Whitney © copyround 2017
Permission is granted for redistribution if linked to original and AntiCorruption Society is acknowledged.

Last January 2017 a close family relative suffered a serious medical emergency requiring hospitalization. His condition was so critical his kidneys shut down. While in the hospital he was given extremely potent drugs in an attempt to stop life threatening abnormal heart beats. A week later his wife received a letter from his cardiologist’s office informing of the need to monitor his liver function via blood tests after his release. The drug he was receiving that required monitoring was Amiodarone.

We researched Amiodarone online and were shocked by what we discovered.

Amiodarone had been approved by the FDA WITHOUT ANY clinical trials.[1] In fact, the FDA had issued an alert in 2005 warning that it could cause severe (even lethal) pulmonary and or liver conditions and that it could worsen the arrhythmias it was being used to treat.[2] My relative’s cardiologist HAD NOT disclosed these all important facts to him or to his family. The drug was continued even though his chest x-rays revealed that he had newly developed pulmonary “infiltrates”, a lowered oxygen saturation level and was experiencing bouts of shortness of breath. When I informed my sick relative of these side effects, he discontinued the Amiodarone himself.

Then in February the same close family relative developed a post surgical blood clot. His doctor asked him to choose a blood thinning drug. Here are the choices he was given. They were written on the white board in his hospital room:

By offering him three choices, the physician put both the decision and the liability onto him. The fact that both Xarelto & Eliquis have a common side effect of increasing blood creatinine – when his poorly functioning kidneys were already causing his creatinine level to be abnormally high – was neither considered nor revealed. If his choice resulted in his death, it could be said that he had been fully informed (which he had not), had consented (had chosen), and was therefore personally responsible for the outcome.

As the info provided to him by his physician was sketchy at best and he was in the hospital without access to detailed information about these drugs, I did the investigation for him. After reviewing the information I gave him, he chose Coumadin as it was the only one of the three with an anecdote – Vitamin K – and the only one without risk of increased damage to his already injured kidneys.

[My relative took the Coumadin for 10 weeks. Fortunately, he had no new blood clots, no incidence of bleeding, and his creatinine level did not worsen.]

While the American Hospital Association claims that all patients have the right to “informed consent”[3], they don’t disclose that the patient must inform himself of the benefits and risks prior to consenting or dissenting. This lack of reliable information regarding treatment risks also occurs across the country when it comes to vaccines and their many potential (even life threatening) adverse reactions. Continue reading

Would you swallow a data-tracking big pharma smart pill?

THEY’VE GOT $1 TRILLION IN ANNUAL PROFITS TO PROTECT!

Christina Sarich, naturalsociety.com
March 26, 2016


[A critical companion to this excellent article is Big Pharma Exposed. This industry is now waging a war against humanity to achieve profit, control and population reduction. Please print out and share Big Pharma Exposed. We have to discredit this dangerous industry as soon as possible.               ACS Editor]


Big Pharma is spending like never before to make sure patients take their drugs. Investors recently committed $172 million for “smart pills” being developed jointly by Proteus Digital Health and Otsuka Pharmaceuticals. After a pill is swallowed, a microscopic device within the pill relays ‘health data’ to a patch worn by the patient, then to a smartphone, and then (if the patient wishes) to doctors and/or pharmaceutical companies.

digital health

Likewise, an inhaler for patients with lung diseases to record the date and time of every use is being developed by mobile chip giant Qualcomm with heavy investment from Novartis, which runs research and development in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Drug makers lose billions annually when patients don’t fill, refill, or take their prescriptions. So, besides developing smart pills and smart inhalers that tell whether meds have or haven’t been taken, Big Pharma is also finding other ways to ‘nag’ patients into taking every pill their doctors prescribe.

Continue reading

Honest physicians prove that “Evidence Based Medicine” is a fraud!

. . . AND MANY GREAT MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS ARE EXPOSING IT!

By AL Whitney © copyround 2016
Permission is granted for redistribution if linked to original and AntiCorruption Society is acknowledged.

medicineIt is important to understand that whenever you cross the threshold into any health care facility (that accepts insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid) you will be subjected to treatment regimes known as Evidence Based Medicine.  Sounds reassuring, doesn’t it? Unfortunately like all corporate spin used today, the terms are intended to sound good and conceal the truth at the same time.

Retired heart surgeon Dr. Donald Miller, Jr. explained what Evidence Based Medicine is and how it has slithered its way into health care in America in an important article called Modern Medicine at the Crossroads that was published in The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in the Fall of 2015. Here are some important excerpts:

Over the last 50 years the federal government has become increasingly involved in medicine, functioning both as a third-party payer and patron of biomedical research and clinical trials. And starting 25 years ago, modern medicine has come to adopt a new type of probabilistic medical thinking named “evidence-based medicine.”

They [physicians] find the transformations in the medical marketplace wrought by an increasingly intrusive federal regulatory establishment to interfere with their exercise of independent professional judgment and limit their freedom to serve the best interests of their patients….

The “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” (ACA), Public Law 111-148, decrees how medicine is now to be practiced in the United States. Ratified in 2010, ACA becomes fully operational in 2018 . . .

Its mandate is to: assist patients, clinicians, purchasers and policymakers in making informed health decisions by advancing the quality and relevance of evidence concerning the manner in which disease, disorders and other health conditions can effectively and appropriately be presented, diagnosed, treated, monitored and managed….

Proponents . . . say it will help government experts to develop evidence-based guidelines and best practices for delivery of appropriate, cost-effective care.

Continue reading