The real evil in our midst

I watched a wee documentary last night.

Channel 4 did a programme about a mysterious epidemic of Narcolepsy that struck Europe  few years ago.

For those of you not familiar with Narcolepsy, it's a debilitating bugger that causes the victim to be constantly exhausted and to fall asleep without warning at regular times throughout the day and night.  It's a permanent condition and the victim is destined for a life of misery where basically they will need 24 hour care for the rest of their lives.

Fortunately Narcolepsy is very rare, yet around five years ago cases started popping up all over Europe.  The cause was eventually traced back to the Swine Flu vaccination that was doled out at the behest of our friends in the WHO.

This further fuelled a thought that has been lurking at the back of my mind for a long time.  Just who is the enemy here?

We are constantly told that Big Tobacco is the ultimate evil while Big Pharma is the knight in shining armour.  I would contend that Big Pharma is doing far more damage to the health of the planet than smoking ever did.  Big Tobacco is at least honest in its approach – their product may [or may not] cause health problems and there can't be a sinner on the planet who isn't aware of this.  Big Pharma however has inveigled its way into just about everyone's lives with its painkillers, antidepressants, beta blockers  and what have you.  They will vehemently deny any wrong doing and scream blue murder if they are accused of anything.  Their products are all squeaky clean and never ever cause side effects

Apparently you aren't healthy these days unless you are popping your regular dosage of pills and potions.  Yet how many are aware of the side effects of these pills and potions?  And some of those side effects can be debilitating, permanent and in some cases fatal.  So why do people hold Big Pharma in such high regard?

I would contend [with a high degree of confidence] that Big Pharma does far more damage to our health than smoking.  It definitely kills more people every year than second hand smoke ever did seeing as the latter never killed anyone.  So why isn't Big Pharma under the spotlight?  Why aren't the laboratories full of researchers testing the side effects of the countless pills on the market?  Why aren't researchers setting out to prove the damage that Big Pharma causes?

One little example of the hypocrisy that surrounds Big Pharma – The "experts" constantly bleat about how dangerous e-cigarettes may be and that there has been no research into long term effects, yet who did research into the long term effects of Pandemrix [the Swine Flu Jab]?  No one, yet it was pumped into an estimated 11 million people.  Is this not a case of rank hypocrisy?

Of course Big Pharma secretly loves the side effects of their drugs.  Why?  Because they already have a stash of other drugs to counter the side effects of the first.  It is the ultimate sales technique.

I would contend that Big Tobacco is positively benign when compared to Big Pharma.

It's only fair to share...Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on RedditShare on StumbleUponShare on Tumblr

Comments

The real evil in our midst — 10 Comments

  1. You are indeed correct about the damage from the medical industry being greater than smoking, even if you use the theoretical (and totally imaginary) figures from SAMMEC that Tobacco Control like to bandy around.

    When you've got a spare half-hour, cast your eyes over this:

    http://www.whale.to/a/null9.html

    It's a bit of an eye-opener.

    • I forgot to include a quote from that linked report:

      "Our estimated 10-year total of 7.8 million iatrogenic deaths is more than all the casualties from all the wars fought by the US throughout its entire history. "

      That's quite something, eh?

      • Oops, sorry about this serial posting, but I just saw another pertinent quote from that paper:

        In 1994, Leape said he was well aware that medical errors were not being reported.(16) A study conducted in two obstetrical units in the UK found that only about one-quarter of adverse incidents were ever reported, to protect staff, preserve reputations, or for fear of reprisals, including lawsuits.(24). An analysis by Wald and Shojania found that only 1.5% of all adverse events result in an incident report, and only 6% of adverse drug events are identified properly. The authors learned that the American College of Surgeons estimates that surgical incident reports routinely capture only 5-30% of adverse events. In one study, only 20% of surgical complications resulted in discussion at morbidity and mortality rounds.(25) From these studies, it appears that all the statistics gathered on medical errors may substantially underestimate the number of adverse drug and medical therapy incidents. They also suggest that our statistics concerning mortality resulting from medical errors may be in fact be conservative figures.

        • I'm having a job keeping up! 

          So taking the most generous estimate that 20% of all incidents are reported, that means that the number of iatrogenic deaths in 2001 would be near 3.9 million [783,936 x 5] ?  Please tell me I'm wrong!!

          • It's a good reason not to go to the doctor! 🙂

            These figures mostly relate just to the USA. What it would be worldwide (particularly in less developed countries) is anybody's guess!

            But they wear white coats. And they're 'experts'. And they are only doing what's good for us. They do know best, after all.

             

  2. OMG finally real people talking real irish/english that are not calling each other conspiritors and the likes 🙂 I seen my own mother after having a tripple bypass and it was the recovery medication that was going to kill her if she didn't get away from it. That's a scary list of stuff on the link from nisakiman comment above.

    • Welcome Gerry!  The one thing I try to avoid is the conspiracy theory area.  Big Pharma isn't a theory – it's simply glossing over the facts to maximise its profits.  That's not something I would normally object to but in this case it's at the expense of people's health and lives.

  3. Just as you mentioned it above about watching a documentary I recently watched one on http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/ it was about Cancer and it would open your eyes to what's at stake for any individual in not taking an interest in their own health outside of the what you would be made to believe. Great site by the way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *