rss feed

If Morality Challenges Profit, Profit Seldom Loses

Posted on Nov 21, 2008 03:37:30 AM | Choose Languages :
English flagItalian flagKorean flagChinese (Simplified) flagPortuguese flagGerman flagFrench flagSpanish flagJapanese flagArabic flagRussian flagIndonesian flag


In June (2002), the New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most respected medical journals, made a startling announcement. The editors declared that they were dropping their policy stipulating that authors of review articles of medical studies couldn’t have financial ties to drug companies whose medicines were being analyzed.

The reason? The journal could no longer find enough independent experts.

Drug company gifts and “consulting fees” are so pervasive that in any given field, you can’t find an expert who has not been paid off in some way by the industry. So the journal settled for a new standard: Their reviewers can have received no more than $10,000 (per year) from “companies whose work they judge.”

Isn’t that comforting?

This announcement by the New England Journal of Medicine is just the tip of the iceberg of a scientific establishment that has been pervasively corrupted by conflicts of interest and bias, throwing doubt on almost all scientific claims made in the biomedical field.

The standard announced in June was only for the reviewers. The actual authors of scientific studies in medical journals are often bought and paid for by private drug companies, with a stake in the scientific results.

While the NEJM and some other journals disclose these conflicts, others don’t. Unknown to many readers is the fact that the data being discussed was often collected and analyzed by the maker of the drug involved in the test.

In other words, there are several substitute treatments for cancer that’ll not provide Large Pharma a single penny of revenue, much less profits. This means these same treatments won’t provide the media with a single penny of revenue either.

Guess which treatments the media pushes? In fact, the Federal Trade Commission will not allow substitute cancer treatments to be advertised, because all of them are “unproven” (translation: not profitable to Massive Pharma). There are ways to get around this FTC rule, such as a book author creating an infomercial promoting his book.

There is a war going on in medicine this day; a war between orthodox (allopathic) medicine and alternative (natural) medicine. The war is being fought with money and information. The war is to control what you know, and don’t know, about cancer treatments.

The war is to control whether you know the truth about all of your cancer treatment options.

When a new discovery is made, the only question that’s asked is this: “Is it profitable enough?” If the answer is ‘no’ the treatment is buried.

Now, perhaps you know why medical costs continue to skyrocket through the roof. When a new natural nutrient is found that’s proven to kill cancer cells or stop the spread of cancer, do they ask whether this nutrient can be used in a natural treatment for cancer? Of course not!

The first question that’s asked is this:

“How can we mutate and synthesize this nutrient, patent it, and make it into a profitable drug?” And with the media we can bury the natural alternative.

Ponder that last paragraph carefully, because it is the heart and soul of modern medicine. Find a natural substance that cures something, bury this fact, then fabricate, synthesize, and mutate the key natural substance, then patent the mutation, and make huge profits.

That is why there is “no scientific evidence” for substitute treatments; no one is looking, because they cannot be patented and thus are not profitable enough.

Do you want to know the mark-up of some common drugs?
The U.S. Commerce Department did, and came up with
some interesting numbers

Product Name - tab size - quantity - $ retail - $ Mfg Cost - Profit %

Celebrex 100 mg - (100 tablets): $130.27 - $0.60 - 21,712%
Claritin 10 mg - (100 tablets): $215.17 - $0.71 - 30,306%
Norvasc 10 mg - (100 tablets): $188.29 - $0.14 - 134,493%
Prevacid 30 mg - (100 tablets): $44.77 - $1.01 - 34,136%
Prilosec 20 mg - (100 tablets): $360.97 - $0.52 - 69,417%
Prozac 20 mg - (100 tablets) : $247.47 - $0.11 - 224,973%
Tenormin 50 mg - (100 tablets): $104.47 - $0.13 - 80,362%
Vasotec 10 mg - (100 tablets): $102.37 - $0.20 - 51,185%
Xanax 1 mg - (100 tablets) : $136.79 - $0.024 - 569,958%

Big Pharma claims that these prices are necessary for them to continue with their extensive and costly research, plus the lobby efforts to get a speedy approval.

Can you believe the gall and audacity of the Large Pharma companies! Most of their mark-up is designed to cover other costs, such as lobbyists and advertising. Do you see what is going on here? The reason there’s no official “scientific evidence” for alternative cancer treatments and cancer prevention treatments is that they are not highly profitable when compared to Large Pharma. It is impossible, by law, for a substance to be considered to have scientific evidence unless Large Pharma submits it to the FDA (and they subsequently approve it), and they’ll only submit things that are very, very profitable to them. That is just how business operates, consumers are not considered important.

It is the Massive Plan of Big Pharma to destroy substitute medicine, especially as it relates to their most profitable products, such as cancer drugs, heart drugs, allergy drugs, etc.

About the Author

Joni Bell has many years of extensive study in the area of natural cancer prevention and treatment. He has numerous success stories of people being diagnosed living cancer free with use of alternative methods. Ask Joni Bell

Article Source: Content for Reprint

[Source : Full text health articles - Content for Reprint]

Please take the time to visit original contents source to find out more about topic you are interested.

Sponsored Links :

  • World Affairs: “A Society Drowning in Corruption, Destruction ...


    People who had not yet voiced any response to the political situation clearly shouted, 'Death to Khamenei,' a slogan seldom if ever heard before at any protest in Iran.” (“Iran—a power structure cracked but far from swept away,” A World To Win ... The roots of these conditions lie in a whole history, and present-day reality, of a world dominated by imperialism—by a system driven to maximize profit through exploitation, whose logic and political and economic relations are ...more
  • Responding to Sean Carroll: What If There Had Been a Camera at the ...


    Anothony McCarthy, I challenge you to give me a sound scientific reason why life found elsewhere would not best be dictated by natural selection. I dare you to do it. I want to see if you can actually back up all those general pronouncments with evidence. .... 3) Profit! Wait, no - 3)Richard Lewontin criticized an approach used to find life on Mars - I like Richard Lewontin! 4) Exobiology is a pseudoscience! Hopefully I'm wrong, because that's kinda depressing. ...more
  • In Health Care Overhaul, Language Matters - Economix Blog ...


    Many of the other factors that will play a role in determining future fiscal conditions over the long term pale by comparison with the challenges of containing growth in the cost of federal health insurance programs. ... They profit by denying payments to people providing health care services. Health insurance has come to mean that any plausible, even if obviously wrong, reason for denying payments is seized upon by insurers to protect their own interests. ...more
  • President Obama: The Birth of a Moral Leader


    Those on the right are able to do one thing that progressives are seldom able to do: They can use words like moral and noble and hero without using air quotes and turning them into “moral” and “noble” and “hero. ..... In business, a person acts first in his self interest, and his share holders, and worry about his employees, the vendors and finally the society at large if the profit margin allows it; any social service is done, if it helps in enhancing the business image. ...more
 
 

Leave a comment:

hostgator