Mainstream Media Journalism Is An Illusion

fakenews

via: TheEndOfLies
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
Jon Rappoport
February 2, 2017

—Some of the greatest illusions are sitting out in the open. They are bypassed for two reasons. People refuse to believe they are illusions, despite the abundant evidence; and the professionals dedicated to upholding the illusions continue their work as if nothing at all has been exposed.

Medical journalists in the mainstream rely completely on studies published in prestigious journals.

This is the rock. This is the science.

This is also the source of doctors’ authoritarian and arrogant advice to patients.

“Studies show…”

Well, that wraps it up. Nothing else to prove. The studies in the journals are the final word.

Medical reporters base their entire careers on these published reports.

But what if higher and more credible authorities rejected all these studies? What if they’ve scrutinized more studies than any reporter or doctor possibly could…and have come to a shocking and opposite conclusion?

This very thing has happened. And the conclusions have been published. But medical reporters ignore them and go their merry way, as if a vast pillar of modern medicine is still intact…when it isn’t, when it has been decimated.

Buckle up.

Let us begin with a statement made by Dr. Marcia Angell, the former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine, perhaps the most prestigious medical journal in the world—a journal that routinely vets and prints thousands of medical studies:

“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.” —Marcia Angell, MD, The New York Review of Books, January 15, 2009

You might want to read that statement several times, to savor its full impact. Then proceed to this next one, penned by the editor of The Lancet, another elite and time-honored medical journal that publishes medical studies:

Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…

“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…”

Still standing? Here are several more statements. They are devastating.

The NY Review of Books (May 12, 2011), Helen Epstein, “Flu Warning: Beware the Drug Companies”:

“Six years ago, John Ioannidis, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Ioannina School of Medicine in Greece, found that nearly half of published articles in scientific journals contained findings that were false, in the sense that independent researchers couldn’t replicate them. The problem is particularly widespread in medical research, where peer-reviewed articles in medical journals can be crucial in influencing multimillion- and sometimes multibillion-dollar spending decisions. It would be surprising if conflicts of interest did not sometimes compromise editorial neutrality, and in the case of medical research, the sources of bias are obvious. Most medical journals receive half or more of their income from pharmaceutical company advertising and reprint orders, and dozens of others [journals] are owned by companies like Wolters Kluwer, a medical publisher that also provides marketing services to the pharmaceutical industry.”

Here’s another quote from the same article:

“The FDA also relies increasingly upon fees and other payments from the pharmaceutical companies whose products the agency is supposed to regulate. This could contribute to the growing number of scandals in which the dangers of widely prescribed drugs have been discovered too late. Last year, GlaxoSmithKline’s diabetes drug Avandia was linked to thousands of heart attacks, and earlier in the decade, the company’s antidepressant Paxil was discovered to exacerbate the risk of suicide in young people. Merck’s painkiller Vioxx was also linked to thousands of heart disease deaths. In each case, the scientific literature gave little hint of these dangers. The companies have agreed to pay settlements in class action lawsuits amounting to far less than the profits the drugs earned on the market. These precedents could be creating incentives for reduced vigilance concerning the side effects of prescription drugs in general.”

Also from the NY Review of Books, here are two more quotes from Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine (“Drug Companies and Doctors: A Story of Corruption”):

“Consider the clinical trials by which drugs are tested in human subjects. Before a new drug can enter the market, its manufacturer must sponsor clinical trials to show the Food and Drug Administration that the drug is safe and effective, usually as compared with a placebo or dummy pill. The results of all the (there may be many) are submitted to the FDA, and if one or two trials are positive—that is, they show effectiveness without serious risk—the drug is usually approved, even if all the other trials are negative.”

Here is another Angell statement:

“In view of this control and the conflicts of interest that permeate the enterprise, it is not surprising that industry-sponsored [drug] trials published in medical journals consistently favor sponsors’ drugs—largely because negative results are not published, positive results are repeatedly published in slightly different forms, and a positive spin is put on even negative results. A review of seventy-four clinical trials of antidepressants, for example, found that thirty-seven of thirty-eight positive studies were published. But of the thirty-six negative studies, thirty-three were either not published or…

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

 

Advertisements

How The Medical Establishment Is Making The American Populace Sicker

TheBreakaway
Zy Marquiez
June 10, 2016

“Probably as much as 75% of the medicine of sickness is unnecessary and its cost can be avoided.”
–  Dr. Ghislaine Lanctot, Author Of The Medical Mafia

“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.”
–Marcia Angell, MD, New York Review of Books, 2009

The video above delineates the link between the lack of health in our society, and the enormous amount of prescription drugs that people within American society take.

In it Dr. James L. Chesnut speaks about the current state of health of the populace, and how the link between drug use and health isn’t as copacetic as the establishment would like you to believe.

Its only a three minute video, so when you have the time please take a gander at it.

In any case, to further elaborate on the issue in America, there are over 4 Billion medications prescribed per annum, and it wouldn’t be out of the realm of reasonable educated guesswork to estimate that the number has increased.[1]

With Americans taking more medications than any other country in the world, is our health any better?

The evidence states otherwise.

Not only is our corrupt for-health for-profit medical system unsurprisingly the most expensive in the world [2], but our life expectancy is worse than that of a third world country.[3]

Those who have been paying attention to the latest medical studies, and those who have been paying attention longer than that will of course know one of the overwhelming reasons for the above disturbing facts: the nigh endless over-medication of the American populace.

Most people don’t know it’s illegal in all countries but two for pharmaceutical companies to advertise directly to consumers.  Those countries are the United States and New Zealand.[4]

As mentioned in a previous piece:

“Many people do not know this, and for good reason.  The pharmaceutical companies would prefer people not realize what’s illegal elsewhere, because it would quickly show incisive individuals something is amyss.  People would immediately question the veracity of the situation.

Why is this important?  Because that law is in place to protect individuals from the highly specialized, and yet misleading advertising of all drugs.

Misleading because, as Dr. Brogan notes in her landmark book, A Mind Of Your Own:

“…only two studies are required for FDA licensure of most pharmaceuticals, essentially leaving the population to participate in a post-marketing experiment in which adverse effects – casualties – are monitored passively.  It’s a fabrication of science to think these drugs have a place in medicine, what is meant to be the art of healing.” [5][Bold Emphasis Added]

Brogan continues outlining how efficient Big Pharma advertising is:

“It’s been calculated that DTCA [drug-to-consumer advertising] is responsible for nearly half (49 percent) of requests for drugs.  And fully seven out of ten times doctors prescribe based on appeal by patients who learned through their computers and televisions that they have an “imbalance” that must be fixed with a pill.”[6][Bold Emphasis Added]

More disturbingly, there is no extensive long term studies carried out to clear Big Pharma drugs before getting approval.  And these very drugs that have not been tested in any true long term settings continued to be doled out by the Billions per annum. 

Getting to the core of the matter, Dr. Brogan elaborates:

Their patients have never consented to the long-term effects of these medications because pharmaceutical research is, by nature, short term.  There is no incentive on the part of the pharmaceutical  companies to take a good look at what happens to the average individual when she takes a medication for a decade or so.”[7][Bold Emphasis Added]

Furthermore, as has been known for over a decade due to the unprecedented study Dr. Barbara Starfield  named “Is US Health The Best In The World?” and reinforced recently with further studies not long ago by the British Medical Journal, preventable medical errors are the third leading cause of death in the United States. [8][9]

Why is that relevant?  Because people keep popping pills like they are candy without knowing full well the risks they are taking.

Ruminate a bit.  Conservative estimates say preventable medical errors kill [conservatively] 250,000 people EVERY YEAR.  Some estimates go higher than 400,000 and more.

In any logical and reasonable world, that would be an outright catastrophe.

Any other industry killing hundreds of thousands [the car industry, tobacco, food, etc.] would be stormed by the media, politicians and the populace for such a prodigious death rate.

In America, though, that’s “normal”.

It might be time to evaluate what passes for normal in America.

What’s next?  Drug out of vending machines?

Oh wait, we’re there already.  No, this is not a joke.

As if rampant drugs on college campuses weren’t an issue that was hush-hush already, Arizona State University plans on selling drugs out of vending machines.[10]

We can see the drug use will become easier and predictably increase.  Of course, profits depend on it.

But what about the use of [un]common sense?  Will that become easier?  What about seeking reason?  Will that become easier?

Its your job as an individual – your responsibility – to know what world you’re living in.

In the world of profits-before-people, people question nothing.

In a world of sound reason and logic, people question everything. 

Open minded skepticism is the answer.

What world do you live in?

_______________________________________________________________

Sources & References:

[1] http://www.naturalnews.com/037226_drug_prescriptions_medical_news_pills.html
https://thebreakaway.wordpress.com/2016/03/14/the-medical-mafia-the-true-nature-of-health-in-our-country/
[2] http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-06-22/us-healthcare-snapshot-most-expensive-yet-worst-developed-world
[3] http://www.salon.com/2013/10/22/life_expectancy_in_america_rivals_third_world_partner/
[4] https://thebreakaway.wordpress.com/2016/04/06/seen-any-big-pharma-drug-advertisements-lately-why-individuals-must-be-highly-skeptical-of-big-pharma-drug-pushing/
[5] Kelly Brogan M.D., A Mind Of Your Own – The Truth About Depression, pg. 49
[6] Ibid., p. 52.
[7] Ibid., p. 35.
[8] http://www.health-care-reform.net/causedeath.htm
[9] http://www.bmj.com/content/353/bmj.i2139
[10] http://www.naturalnews.com/054295_prescription_vending_machines_InstyMeds_college_campus.html

Zika Fake Science Back In The News; Con Artists At Work

TruthLies
Source:NoMoreFakeNews.com
Jon Rappoport
April 16, 2016

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)

Is it about science or money?

US health agencies want more than the $600 million they’ve allotted to the “war against Zika.” They want $1.9 billion. Why not? They always want more money.

To make their case, the CDC has pushed out a new Zika study in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM): “Zika Virus and Birth Defects — Reviewing the Evidence for Causality”. (For the CDC’s conference call with the android press, click here).

Before commenting on that study, let’s recall a devastating statement the NEJM’s former editor, Marcia Angell, issued in 2009, after she had headed up that non-science machine for 20 years:

“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.”

As criticisms of fake science go, this one, from an elite insider, ranks near the top of the list. It is a direct accusation of widespread fraud. Otherwise known as lying, cheating, massaging data, hiding data, and so on.

In other words, the NEJM has been publishing studies and reports that, regardless of their convincing language, are “cooked” to appear true when they most definitely weren’t.

Therefore, right up front, a new Zika study published in the NEJM is highly suspect, to say the very least. There is no reason to accept its data, methods, or findings. Except perhaps as an article of religious faith. But medical journals aren’t supposed to be religious publications, the last time I looked.

The new NEJM study on Zika aims to eliminate doubt that the Zika virus causes microcephaly.

Until now, that doubt was widespread. Even the World Health Organization was making careful statements: “…although no definite causal link has been established between Zika and microcephaly (babies born with smaller heads and brain damage), we believe there is a connection…” That sort of thing.

The new NEJM study is supposed to erase, once and for all, that “maybe.”

But it doesn’t. It’s not even close. Because when you wade through the rather dense language, what you see is an attempt to show a correlation between the presence of the Zika virus and the occurrence of the birth defect.

Correlation is not causation. And that’s just the beginning of the problem.

Even on the basis of correlation, nowhere in the study do we see anything approaching a high degree of association. You would expect to find evidence that in, say, 80 or 90 percent of cases, the Zika virus was found in babies who developed the defect. That evidence isn’t there. Well, how about a 90-percent correlation between microcephaly in the baby and Zika found in the mother? Not there, either. Again, not even close.

Continue Reading At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com

—————————————————————————

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.