Modern Medicine by Itself is an Epidemic

War is Crime
by Bill Sardi

More than two-thousand years ago Hippocrates was the first physician to issue a word of caution about the over-use of medicines. Hippocrates invoked an oath to “first do no harm” before doctors reach for the latest nostrum.

In 1976 Austrian philosopher and Catholic priest Ivan Illich, in his book Medical Nemesis, launched what was then considered “the gravest health hazard we face today: our medical system.

Illich was unforgiving. The first sentence in his text reads: “The medical establishment has become a major threat to health.” His second sentence: “The disabling impact of professional control over medicine has reached the proportions of an epidemic.” Readers needn’t have read another sentence but to obtain the details.

Illich went on to say: “The public has been alerted to the perplexity and uncertainty of the best among its hygienic caretakers…. the pioneers of yesterday’s so-called breakthroughs warn their patients against the dangers of the miracle cures they have only just invented.”

Illich didn’t suggest the public panic over this revelation but rather that public discussion ensue. Illich thought “the layman and not the physician has the potential perspective and effective power to stop the current iatrogenic (physician-caused) epidemic.”

Illich concluded that the misdirection of modern medicine “can be reversed only through a recovery of the will to self-care among the laity, and through the legal, political and institutional recognition of the right to care, which imposes limited upon the professional monopoly of physicians.”

That self-care revolution never happened. Ivan Illich’s urgent plea for the public to back away from “cut, burn and poison” medicine was not heeded. The practice of medicine has become more complex and more beyond the reach of the laity to understand it. Just run to the doctor for what ails you is the order of the day.

Confessions of a Medical Heretic

Then in 1979 came Dr. Robert S. Mendesohn’s memorable text: Confessions Of A Medical Heretic.

It took a lot for Dr. Mendelsohn to become a medical heretic. He says he failed to be suspicious of oxygen therapy for prematurely born infants even when 90% of all low birth-weight infants became partially or totally blind (in less advanced hospitals where oxygen therapy was not practiced, the incident of blindness among preemies was ~10%).

He dutifully prescribed Terramycin for respiratory infections which was said to produce no side effects until it was realized this antibiotic did little for this type of infection and left thousands of children with yellow-green teeth and tetracycline deposits in their bones.

Dr. Mendelsohn confessed to his belief in the irradiation of tonsils under the mistaken assumption doses of radiation used were harmless. A decade later thyroid tumors were cropping up among those irradiated patients.

Over time Dr. Mendelsohn became a full-blown medical heretic. He said: “Despite all the super technology and elite bedside manner that’s supposed to make you feel about as well cared for as an astronaut on the way to the moon, the greatest danger to your health is the doctor who practices modern medicine.”

Mendelsohn went on to boldly say “that more than ninety percent of modern medicine could disappear from the face of the earth – doctors, hospitals, drugs and equipment – and the effect on our health would be immediate and beneficial.”

How prophetic Dr. Mendelsohn was. His words are so descriptive of the present predicament.

If you make the mistake of going to the doctor with a cold or the flu, he’s liable to give you antibiotics, which are not only powerless against colds and flu but which leave you more likely to come down with worse problems.”


“If your child is a little too peppy for his teacher to handle, your doctor may go too far and turn him into a drug dependent.

If you’re foolish enough to make that yearly visit for a routine examination… the doctor’s very presence could raise your blood pressure enough so that you won’t go home empty handed. Another life ‘saved’ by antihypertensive drugs. Another sex life down the drain, since more impotence is caused by drug therapy than by psychological problems.”

Dr. Mendelson launched a war against modern medicine and said “you can tell when you’re winning this war when you influence those closest to you.”

That war has been lost. Most people who embrace natural medicine and shun doctors are outcasts in their own families.

Other Books

Other books followed that cited the ongoing horrors of modern medicine:

1988: Medicine on Trial, by Charles B. Inlander.
1988: Worse Than The Disease, by Diana B. Dutton.
1992: Racketeering in Medicine, by James P. Carter, MD.
1993: Making Medicine, Making Money, by Donald Drake & Marian Uhlman.
1994: Bitter Medicine, by Jane Kassler, MD.
1994: Why I Left Orthodox Medicine, by Derrick Lonsdale, MD.
2007: Overtreated, by Shannon Brownlee.
2008: Overdosed America, John Abramson, MD.
2010: Overdiagnosed, H. Gilbert Welch, MD.

The result: only more caskets were being sold.

Does the Written Word Make an Impact Any Longer?

Does the written word change the course of humanity? Certainly the Bible has. Martin Luther’s 95 Theses did. But none of the texts cited above made even a dent in the “progress” of modern medicine’s assault against humanity.

A few years back someone cited these facts about book reading:

One-third of high school graduates never read another book for the rest of their lives.

58% of the US adult population never reads another book after high school.
42% of college graduates never read another book.

80% of US families did not buy or read a book last year.

70% of US adults have not been in a bookstore in the last five years.

The pervasiveness of electronic methods of communication and the dissemination of propaganda and distorted reality of television has changed the course of history itself.

For example: “Television news” said the Gulf of Tonkin happened (no, there was never any North Vietnam boat that shot at a US Navy ship), but off to war America went against a tiny nation the size of the State of Georgia and a population of just 16 million against a country of 200 million with advanced military weapons. Vietnam won.

The news media helped to fabricate the public’s perception of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Investigators who dared to stray into what really went occurred on that November day in 1963 suddenly died.

And so too, American news media, whose boards of directors are often laced with executives of pharmaceutical and health insurance companies and hospital chains, continues to almost copy word-for-word press releases issued by the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control, Food & Drug Administration that serve as a front for the racketeering going on in medicine today.

For example, the 2009 flu epidemic was never an epidemic. It was all fabricated by the Centers for Disease Control to help sell flu vaccines.

Belittle the Competition

A secondary agenda is to use the news media to demean and belittle any competition posed by healthy diets or dietary supplements. Why promote a low-carbohydrate diet when the next prescription diet pill garners millions of advertising dollars for TV networks?

A spate of recent news reports are now scaring Americans away from vitamin and herbal supplements at a time when millions of Americans suffer from conditions that are simply nutrient deficiencies. It is an orchestrated effort against self-care.

CODEX, a regulatory body assembled by the United Nations and the World Health Organization, has just voted to water down vitamin requirements in foods, thus ensuring a certain level of disease to treat.

We Need Diseases to Create Jobs

Government sees the medical industry as a source of jobs as the population ages. Why cure or prevent any chronic age-related diseases when a certain level of disease is needed to maintain jobs? Health care costs are not deemed to be an expense but rather an industry that contributes to the Gross Domestic Product. In reality, it is a $3 trillion drag on the economy that has not produced greater life expectancy (US life expectancy ranks 27th out of 34 countries deemed to be economic peers). Life expectancy in some US counties is no better than some third-world countries.

The masses have little choice because they have no money. An estimated 53% of American workers make no more than $30,000 a year and the growth in part-time jobs is soaring above full-time employment. A $30,000 annual salary may have been adequate in 1980 but due to inflation one would have to make $85,000 to have the same purchasing power today. The people have no money to make choices outside those served up by the health insurance/ physician/ Big Pharma/ hospital chain cabal. Fascist (industry-controlled) medicine prevails.

For now, it’s every man for himself.

Patients held for observation can face steep drug bills

USA Today
by Susan Jaffe

Sudden chest pains landed Diane Zachor in a Duluth, Minn., hospital overnight, but weeks later she had another shock — a $442 bill for the everyday drugs she also takes at home, including more than a half dozen common medicines to control diabetes, heart problems and high cholesterol.

“I just couldn’t believe some of these prices they charge,” said Zachor, 66. “It’s just atrocious.” For the price she was charged for her insulin during her 18-hour stay at St. Luke’s Hospital, Zachor would have enough to cover her out-of-pocket expenses for a three-month supply under her private Medicare Advantage plan. The tab for one water pill to control high blood pressure could buy a three-week supply. And the bill for one calcium tablet could purchase enough for three weeks, when she gets them over the counter from a national chain pharmacy.

Even though her health plan covers medical and drug expenses, her policy would not pay the hospital drug bill because St. Luke’s never formally admitted her, instead billing the visit as observation care, which is considered outpatient service.
That observation label excludes thousands of patients every year from full Medicare coverage. Many have spent more than a day in the hospital and had regular hospital rooms and service and, as with Zachor, never realized they weren’t admitted.
These observation patients might wind up paying a larger share of their hospital bills than inpatients, since they usually have a co-payment for doctors’ fees and each hospital service.

But Medicare doesn’t pay at all for routine drugs that observation patients need for chronic conditions such as diabetes, high blood pressure or high cholesterol — drugs that Zachor could have brought from home if the hospital allowed it and she had time to get them. Medicare has no rules for what hospitals can bill for non-covered drugs, so they can charge any amount.
A shock, afterward

It’s an unwelcome surprise for patients who may not get the bad news until they receive a hospital bill. Medicare has no rules requiring hospitals to tell patients when they are in observation status or that they will be responsible for paying any non-covered Medicare services, said Ellen Griffith, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
“St. Luke’s carries out ‘observation’ and all other health care policies as prescribed by Medicare rules,” said Mary Greene, a St. Luke’s Hospital representative, in an e-mail. She referred any questions to Medicare.

Drug prices have also surprised seniors in other parts of the country:

•In Missouri, several Medicare observation patients were billed $18 for one baby aspirin, said Ruth Dockins, a senior advocate at the Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging.

•Pearl Beras, 85, of Boca Raton, Fla., said in an interview that her hospital charged $71 for one blood pressure pill for which her neighborhood pharmacy charges 16 cents.

•In California, a hospital billed several patients $111 for one pill that reduces nausea; for the same price, they could have bought 95 of the pills at a local pharmacy, said Tamara McKee, program manager for the Health Insurance Counseling & Advocacy Program at the Alliance on Aging in Monterey County, Calif., who handled at least 20 complaints last year from Medicare beneficiaries about excessive hospital drug bills.

The most recent government statistics show the number of observation claims that hospitals submitted to Medicare rose 46% to 1.4 million from 2006 to 2010, and the number of cases lasting longer than 48 hours more than tripled.

The American Hospital Association, in a 2010 letter to Medicare officials, said several factors explain that growth, including increasingly restrictive Medicare criteria for the hospital admission and rising use of audits to monitor hospital decisions and billing. In addition, it said, physicians sometimes try to keep seniors in the hospital because they may not be well enough to be home, even when they’re not sick enough to be admitted.

“I don’t blame the hospitals,” said attorney Gill Deford at the Center for Medicare Advocacy, based in Connecticut, which has filed a class-action lawsuit against the federal government on behalf of observation patients who, because of their observation status, become ineligible for Medicare coverage for nursing home care when they leave the hospital.

The lawsuit seeks to either eliminate observation status or require hospitals to tell patients when they’re admitted for observation and allow them to appeal the designation. Observation status “is a big money-saver for the Medicare program,” he said. Medicare officials recommend to hospitals — but do not require — that patients remain under observation for no more than 24 to 48 hours. After that, the patients should be switched to inpatient status or discharged, the officials recommend. But patients can linger in observation for several days and often don’t know they haven’t been admitted.

Difference in pricing

Since the program does not limit the prices for drugs that Medicare doesn’t cover, that can create an opportunity that hospitals might find hard to resist.

Hospitals use their pharmacies to help generate revenue to subsidize the other operating costs of the facility, said Miriam Mobley Smith, dean of the College of Pharmacy at Chicago State University. She said the “upcharge” is based on numerous factors, including personnel, insurance and facility costs.

“I’m not justifying the charges,” she said, “but there’s a huge difference between the cost of operating a retail pharmacy compared to a hospital pharmacy.”

Even patients with private Medicare Part D drug insurance may find that their policies don’t cover their everyday — or “self-administered” — drugs given to them in the hospital.

“These drugs may be covered under certain circumstances,” according to the Medicare website. But there is no requirement that Part D beneficiaries must be fully reimbursed for these drugs.

Seniors advocate Dockins said that requiring hospital pharmacies to participate in the Medicare Part D drug plans would help control pricing because the beneficiaries would get discounts negotiated by the plan.

To avoid drug charges, she tells seniors to bring their pills in the original bottles when they go into the hospital. But hospitals are not required to let patients use their own medicine from home, said Leta Blank, coordinator for the Senior Health Insurance Assistance Program in Montgomery County, Md.

Dockins suggests that low-income seniors apply for a hospital’s charity care program so that the charges can be waived or reduced, if they qualify.

Zachor, who works as an office manager for the Minnesota Citizens Federation, a consumer advocacy group, contacted her Medicare Advantage plan to appeal its decision to not cover her hospital drug bill.

In February, her insurer said it requires hospitals with which it contracts “to notify a member before delivering a non-covered service.” Because the hospital didn’t obtain Zachor’s written consent to accept those charges, the plan’s rules say the hospital cannot bill her for them.

However, other Medicare Advantage plans — which cover about a quarter of Medicare beneficiaries — may simply follow the traditional Medicare program, which does not require advance notice. Beneficiaries should check with their insurance companies.

Zachor’s $442 drug bill was scrapped. She had to pay only $50, the co-pay for an emergency room visit.
“What if I didn’t know there was a route to go to appeal to my plan?” Zachor said. “I was thinking about other people older than myself who don’t know what to do, and they would probably have to go without food or medications — for how long — to pay a bill they didn’t have to pay.”

Related:  Medicare: Inpatient or Outpatient?

Polypills: Doctors’ Attempt to Get Rich Without Working

Gaia Health
by Heidi Stevenson

One Pill to rule them all, One Pill to find them, One Pill to bring them all and in the darkness bind them – In the Land of Pharma where the Biggest Profits lie. This is polypharmacy, coming soon to your native land.

Using only the highest-sounding phraseology, doctors at a convention are pushing the polypill, a combination of drugs they want to push on every single person upon reaching a certain age. They bemoan the incredibly high rate of heart disease, calling it the single greatest epidemic the world has ever known.

Reporting for heartwire in One pill to cure them all: Single-drug polypharmacy in cardiovascular disease, Michael O’Riordan quotes Dr. Salim Yusuf, who organized the conference, Global Summit on Combination Polypharmacy for Cardiovascular Disease, as saying:

This is not about a pill. This is about a strategy to reduce cardiovascular disease by 50% globally in a cost-effective manner.

If you believe that, then you probably believe all the lies told about statins, one of the drugs to be included in the polypill, a drug that is now well discounted as both ineffective and carrying devastating adverse effects. Aspirin is another one of the drugs planned for a polypill, and that, too, has been documented as doing more harm than good. There’s talk of including an ACE inhibitor, aspirin, and folic acid (a vitamin!), too.

The entire concept behind polypharmacy consists of one enormous error. The simple fact is that health is not found in a pill.

Of course, these people have no sense of humor. How else could they have chosen a convention name like “One pill to cure them all”? It sounds like Tolkien’s Sauron, ruler of The Ring Trilogy’s Mordor:

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

Could that be what they’re after—world domination?

The Driver—Profits

By the way, lest anyone suggest that there’s any motive behind any of this beyond profit, please take note of the fact that the term polypill is trademarked. So, I’ll stop using it here. From this point, the term of use will be polypharmacy.

They’re making all sorts of wild claims, saying that polypharmacy could reduce heart disease by 88% and strokes by 80%. These claims are based on … hot air! The reality is that none of these things, with the possible exception of folic acid, has ever been shown to provide genuine benefit—especially in the case of people who do not already suffer from heart disease. And this doesn’t even consider the enormous array of adverse effects these drugs produce individually. Routine aspirin use causes death from gastrointestinal bleeding. Statins do incredible amounts of harm, including memory loss, diabetes, liver and muscle damage, and death. ACE inhibitors can cause hyperkalemia—excess potassium—which can be deadly, leading to kidney failure.

There’s a dearth of serious drug development in the pipeline. Therefore, Big Pharma has been running like mad trying to find alternatives. Polypharmacy is a major play. Even though the drugs in the pill will be well known and likely even generic, having run out their exclusivity time granted by patents, by combining them into a new product they can get a new patent. Voila! Bunches more money can be made off the same old drugs.

The Target

But polypharmacy for heart disease has even more going for it. It’s being billed as a pill for everyone, something to be prescribed automatically, whether an individual already has signs of heart disease or has simply reached a certain age.

What makes polypharmacy so nice for doctors when faced with a patient who presents with vascular symptoms is that the effort is removed. No longer will they need to consider just which pill in their lexicon fits that particular patient. They can simply prescribe the same thing to everyone, a single pill that contains it all.

In the case of people who are just getting up in years, modern medicine has decided that they are, by definition, sick. Rather than figuring out exactly what they need, all a doctor must do is write out a prescription for a multi-pill.

Say! I can see another area for money making. Some clever entrepreneur can set up shop designing and printing all the zillions of identical prescriptions, with everything already made out. All the physician needs to do is enter the patient’s name and date, then send ‘em off to fill it. Since the docs are so eager to make more money while doing less work, this should be a big winner.

And then there’s polypharmacy for lazy patients. Just take Dr. Richard Smith, a former editor of the BMJ, who’s quoted by heartwire as saying:

If I had to go to the doctor every three months to get my blood pressure measured and my lipids measured and have to go back to have my drugs titrated, I couldn’t be bothered with all that. Because I get [my polypills] through the post, and I just take it every night, it’s extremely simple.

It’s just so much more convenient. Take a pill very day, close your eyes and hold your breath, and maybe you’ll just magically never have a heart attack or stroke. Doctors can sit back in confidence, knowing that they’ve got all the bases covered, and they don’t even need to think.

But Big Pharma’s the really big winner. They get to recycle all sorts of old drugs, giving them a new lease on life as patented medicines. Better yet, all the doctors will be handing them out like candy.

There’s so much greed … ummm, that is, there’s so much concern among polypharmacy proponents that countries won’t approve their pet pill combos soon enough, so they’re considering going to the World Health Organization (WHO) to arrange getting polypharmacy pills on the “Essential Medicines” list. The WHO describes the list like this:

The Model List is a guide for the development of national and institutional essential medicine lists. It was not designed as a global standard. However, for the past 30 years the Model List has led to a global acceptance of the concept of essential medicines as a powerful means to promote health equity.

As anyone who has followed these issues in the last few years is aware, there is no need to require a policy. The WHO’s placement of a drug on a list is all that’s necessary to put immense pressure on governments to conform. It’s much the same as Codex Alimentarius rules. They don’t enforce the rules themselves, but treaties end up doing the dirty work for them.

These doctors and Big Pharma are going for the gold. They’re taking these drugs that have provided little or no benefit but produce immense harm, combining them into single new polypharmacy pills, and will push them on the people with all the alacrity they have at their disposal.

One Pill to rule them all, One Pill to find them,
One Pill to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Pharma where the Biggest Profits lie.

This is polypharmacy, coming soon to your native land.

Religious Exemptions to Vaccines are Life or Death Rights

Activist Post
by Sandor White

Over many years, the media and corporations have mounted a concerted effort to demean religious faith and to portray certain religious groups as dangerous to modern society. Darwin and evolution are often the means, pitting “modern science” against “religious dogma.”

The problem is that “science” has become the pawn of the corporations. People are recognizing that very keenly as they watch the endless lies by Monsanto about genetically engineered food be exposed.

A recent Stanford “study,” blasted all over the country by media, purporting to show that organic food is no different from pesticide-ridden crops, is a prime example, with only a bit of investigating revealing that the person behind the study had once done bogus studies for the Tobacco Industry as well. The study is so loose with reality that it even says agribusiness “slows pace of global warming” even though agribusiness’s seeds (and the pharmaceutical industries vaccines and pills) are based on petrochemicals, central to driving global warming.

Science is being cavalierly twisted by the corporations and media, and in a direction that is anti-life. One of the most important protections people have against such falsehoods is, ironically, religious belief.

That belief is meant to be based on conscience and morality. It was the truth-filled, loving force that rid India of the British Empire. It was a strong force against the Vietnam War as priests were willing to go to jail to stop it. It is a force in Burma where Buddhist monks have stood against a repressive government. It is a force in Tibet now as monks have burned themselves to death in response to the totalitarian Chinese rule attempting to stamp out religious life there. There has been a demonization of those opposed to abortion, but has anyone stopped to think what it would mean for this culture to be fine with killing fetuses, not faced with the moral questions raised by those arguing we have no right to take a life?

Right now, true concern for health is being ignored by the WHO, which has turned its back on 47,500 children paralyzed by Bill Gates’ polio campaign in India as well as children damaged or killed in Pakistan. The WHO, the World Bank and Gates are using media to tell the world that the vaccines are eliminating polio, when in fact the scientific community has known for 10 years that it can never be eliminated now that the biotech industry has synthesized the virus (which is twice as deadly as wild polio). Corporate media is a means to seek funds to continue this catastrophe, even suggesting American women personally participate, and to hide from the world that, in fact, polio is being systematically spread across Asia and Africa.

When imams in Africa or groups in Asia object to vaccines, worried that children are being crippled and dying, media is used to assault them for being anti-science, anti-progress, and often imply religious stupidity. Yet it was a religious group that exposed the reality of tetanus vaccines being used to sterilize people.

Americans are aware that the country is being plundered – losing its homes, its jobs, its farms, its access to real food, its economy, its rights – by politicians and corporations both operating without moral values. Americans’ bodies are also under assault. If those bodies can be made ill, they become the source, over a lifetime of sickness, of a fortune for corporations selling vaccines.

This is another form of the Idiot Cycle, in which the companies which sicken people with their toxins then provide the “medicines” to treat those illnesses.

Religious belief is a sizable roadblock to such power, and when it comes to vaccines, it is precisely moral commitment to the life of children and of their community that has stood in the way. That morality often (though not solely) comes from religious belief.

In that context, it is vital to note what is occurring in the US in terms of efforts to undermine religious rights.

The religious exemption to vaccination is now under heavy attack across the country. In the video below, Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), discusses this important exemption, and why it’s so vital we defend our right to opt out of vaccinations for medical, religious, or conscientious belief reasons.
All Americans need to know their options for legally opting-out of vaccinations, and you also need to know why it’s so important to protect this legal option, whether you choose to use every federally recommended vaccine for yourself and your children or not.

The Nuremberg Code was established after the Holocaust to prevent the pharmaceutical industry from ever again forcing “medical procedures” on people against their wil. It is this defense against such industry power that is under attack. Without exemptions, people would be forced to submit their children to vaccines (and perhaps submit themselves if laws are written to include adults). As it is becoming clear the vaccines are actually causing diseases, people are also recognizing that there is profit in diseases (the article is by a Jewish cardiologist).

People, faced with the thought that vaccines may not in fact be the saving miracle of modern medicine, often fall back on what they have been told about the polio and smallpox vaccines as evidence of people’s lives being saved. Polio and smallpox are the big threats that leave people vulnerable to doing whatever the government says if thet announce an outbreak of some infectious disease. Yet what we were told about the polio vaccine is as false as what we have been told about the Smallpox vaccine. We have been fed fear on a steady basis so the public will be willing to submit to whatever “solution” is suggested.

West Nile virus is the latest such scare, with people being told it’s incurable and that spraying of toxic chemicals to kill mosquitoes must be done. Yet West Nile virus has never even been isolated and may actually be a collections of symptoms related to toxins (in which case spraying more is an even more terrible idea that people know it already is), and there is cure but it has been suppressed (as was an easy cure for polio).

(In fact, there is a proven cure for over 70 infectious diseases – meningitis, anthrax, hepatitis, dengue, West Nile, polio, swine flu, etc. See this video), making vaccines obsolete, even if they weren’t dangerous.)

What if a Smallpox outbreak (or any other disease) were announced and the CDC said everyone must get the vaccine? Here is where religious exemptions become vital as a means to refuse, for the CDC has admitted the small pox vaccine caused Smallpox. And in addition, the CDC has admitted the vaccine causes heart problems and warns people should not get it if (quote):

You have been told by a doctor that you have high blood pressure.
You have been told by a doctor that you have high blood cholesterol.
You have been told by a doctor that you have diabetes or high blood sugar.
You have a first degree relative (for example mother, father, brother, or sister) who had a heart condition before the age of 50.

Powerful governments have a long history of undermining religious belief. In its quiet way, such beliefs stand against power and support the moral life and spiritual grounding of human beings. “Science” captured by corporations has been used to demean religious belief. Those same corporations have used media to promote vaccines, to cover up crippling and deaths, and to suppress actual cures. So human thoughts based on moral beliefs are vital protection for life. The assault on religious exemptions for vaccines is meant to remove morality as a roadblock to profits.

Just as morality in general is critical to maintain and even to expand, so too are religious exemptions. Some people may use such exemptions to say “No” to vaccines because they believe they violate a deeply held religious conviction that the body is a blessed gift from God and may not be intruded on by a government. Some may say “No” to being experimented on based on a historical awareness that the pharmaceutical industry worked to develop a means to sterilize people at doctor’s appointments without their knowing. Others may fight for religious exemption because they see the Nuremberg Code as a phoenix rising out of the Holocaust and believe it is their religious obligation to protect it (“the informed consent” of religious exemptions) as part of “Never again.” Other may from religious conviction object to the immorality of an industry generating “diseases for profits.”

Whatever the moral conviction, religious exemptions to vaccines are a spiritual counterbalance to power and profit, and in that, they are essential to all Americans.

Related: The Laws of the Pharmaceutical Industry

Why Are These Fraudulent Papers Unretracted?

CounterPunch

According to Science Times[1], the Tuesday science section in the New York Times, scientific retractions are on the rise because of a “dysfunctional scientific climate” that has created a “winner-take-all game with perverse incentives that lead scientists to cut corners and, in some cases, commit acts of misconduct.”

But elsewhere, audacious, falsified research stands unretracted–including the work of authors who actually went to prison for fraud!

Richard Borison, MD, former psychiatry chief at the Augusta Veterans Affairs medical center and Medical College of Georgia, was sentenced to 15 years in prison for a $10 million clinical trial fraud[2] but his 1996 US Seroquel® Study Group research is unretracted.[3] In fact, it is cited in 173 works and medical textbooks, misleading future medical professionals.[4]

Scott Reuben, MD, the “Bernie Madoff” of medicine who published research on clinical trials that never existed, was sentenced to six months in prison in 2010. But his “research” on popular pain killers like Celebrex and Lyrica is unretracted.[6] If going to prison for research fraud is not enough reason for retraction, what is?

Wayne MacFadden, MD, resigned as US medical director for Seroquel in 2006, after sexual affairs with two coworker women researchers surfaced[7], but the related work is unretracted and was even part of Seroquel’s FDA approval package for bipolar disorder.[8]

More than 50 ghostwritten papers about hormone therapy (HT) written by Pfizer’s marketing firm, Designwrite, ran in medical journals, according to unsealed court documents on the University of California–San Francisco’s Drug Industry Document Archive.[9] Though the papers claimed no link between HT and breast cancer and false cardiac and cognitive benefits and were ghostwritten by marketing professionals not doctors, none has been retracted.

Pfizer/Parke-Davis placed 13 ghostwritten articles[10] in medical journals promoting Neurontin for offlabel uses, including a supplement to the Cleveland Clinic[11] but only Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews and Protocols has retracted the specious articles.[12]

Nor is the phony science just a product of “Big Pharma.” In 2008, JAMA was forced to print a correction stating that authors of an article arguing for a higher recommended dietary allowance of protein were, in fact, industry operatives. [13] Sharon L. Miller was “formerly employed by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association,” and author Robert R. Wolfe, PhD, received money from the Egg Nutrition Center, the National Dairy Council, the National Pork Board, and the Beef Checkoff through the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, said the clarification. Miller’s email address, in fact was smiller@beef.org, which should might have been the JAMA editors’ first tip-off.[14] The article has also not been retracted.

Martha Rosenberg’s is an investigative health reporter. Her first book, Born With A Junk Food Deficiency: How Flaks, Quacks and Hacks Pimp The Public Health, has just been released by Prometheus books.

Notes.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/17/science/rise-in-scientific-journal-retractions-prompts-calls-for-reform.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

[2] Steve Stecklow and Laura Johannes, “Test Case: Drug Makers Relied on Two Researchers Who Now Await Trial,” Wall Street Journal, August 8, 1997

[3] Richard Borison et al., “ICI 204,636, an Atypical Antipsychotic: Efficacy and Safety in a Multicenter, Placebo-Controlled Trial in Patients with Schizophrenia,” Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology 16, no. 2 (April 1996): 158–69

[4] Alan F. Schatzberg and Charles B. Nemeroff, Textbook of Psychopharmacology (New York: American Psychiatric Publishing, 2009) p. 609

[5] http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-medical-madoff-anesthestesiologist-faked-data

[6] Scott Reuben et al., “The Analgesic Efficacy of Celecoxib, Pregabalin, and Their Combination for Spinal Fusion Surgery,” Anesthesia & Analgesia 103, no. 5 (November 2006): 1271–77.

[7] http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-42840768/astrazenecas-sex-for-studies-seroquel-scandal-did-research-chief-bias-the-science/

[8] http://www.lifesciencesworld.com/news/view/12152 (BOLDER study)

[9] Martha Rosenberg, “Flash Back. The Troubling Revival of Hormone Therapy. Consumers Digest, November 2010

[10] Kristina Fiore, “Journals Aided in Marketing of Gabapentin,” MedPage Today, September 11, 2009

[11] United States District Court, District of Massachusetts, Report on the Use of Neurontin for Bipolar and Other Mood Disorders,http://i.bnet.com/blogs/neurontin-09513078512.pdf

[12] P. J. Wiffen et al., “WITHDRAWN: Gabapentin for Acute and Chronic Pain,” Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews and Protocols 16, no. 3 (March 16, 2011); P. J. Wiffen et al., “WITHDRAWN: Anticonvulsant Drugs for Acute and Chronic Pain,” Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews and Protocols no. 1 (January 20, 2010);

[13] http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/299/24/2891.extract

[14] http://www.obesity.org/newsletter/nl200407.html