limpy’s blog

In the Daily Mail, under a similar title, these two state:

“And yet it is only comparatively recently that they have developed an approach that allows them to separate the effective from the ineffective, and the safe from the dangerous.”

Are you really serious about this!?! There is no way that conventional medicine has proven that it’s standards prevent inneffective or dangerous drugs and procedures from coming to market! Look at Ezetimibe,  Vioxx, many implants, surgical techniques and recently simple cough syrups and lets not forget thalidomide. These were all “vetted” by double blind studies and the standards that these two are promoting. The danger from these drugs has in hind site unfortunately been proven. The danger from alternatives is opinion. 

It is estimated that four per cent of all hospital beds in the UK are taken up with patients who have had bad effects from conventional medical treatment and drugs. These two ignore that and keep spouting their misguided and one sided opinions in the guise of “science”. They don’t tally the cost of this mess.

But they have effectively jumped on the bandwagon of bashing alternative medicine and selling lots of books, articles and gaining fame. Misguiding the public into believing that something that has not been proven dangerous  (alternatives) is, and that something that is proven to be dangerous (many but not all conventional treatments and drugs) is not, is what I would call the real “hoodwinking” of the public.

Well, it is not surprising that Sense about Science has come out against alternative health methods and homeopathy and anything not part of the pharmaceutical or big agra industry.

With their medical industry sponsors growing you can really now say that “Sense about Science”  is really a front for pharmaceutical industry and other groups involved in the development of pharmaceuticals and chemicals such as Universities doing “pharmaceutical research and patenting” and medical publishing giants.
Again, it is not surprising that the organization would bash at alternative medicine and homeopathy. Anyone involved with this “sponsored” organization has a lot of funding to lose  if they don’t toe the party line and make their masters happy.

The shrill shrieking of their “sponsored” mouth pieces and followers gets louder and louder- suggesting drugs, MRI radiation, anything chemical, genetically modified are good for you and suggesting that homeopathy is evil  and any ‘alternatives and those against genetic modification are evil.  A profit driven religion of science. And of course there are news reporters that are happy to also get in on the shrill shrieking. Just where the drug companies want it and plant it.

So here we have the source of what and how you may hear about homeopathy. Well, remember the previous post. This pharmaceutical industry is about billions of dollars, marketing and not necessarily about your health.  Your right to alternatives gives you the ability to make sensible decisions about your health and put it all in perspective. These intelligent decisions are yours to make and not the pharmaceutical companies and their paid mouthpieces.

Just look at some of the money bags that “fund” the biased Sense about Science spokespeople: 

ABPI, the Association for Clinical Biochemistry, AstraZeneca plc, the Biochemical Society, BAMA, British Toxicology Society, Blackwell Publishing, BP plc, British Institute of Radiology, British Pharmacological Society, Elsevier, EPSRC, Esmee Fairbairn Foundation, Garfield Weston Foundation, GE Healthcare, Health and Science Communication Trust, Institute of Food Research, Institute of Physics, Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine, Institution of Chemical Engineers, John Innes Centre, John Innes Foundation, Medical Research Council, Motor Neurone Disease Association, Multiple Sclerosis Society, NESTA, New Scientist, Oxford University Press, Parkinson’s Disease Society, Paul Hamlyn Foundation, PHG Foundation, Physiological Society, Research Councils UK, Royal Academy of Engineering, Royal Astronomical Society, Royal College of Pathologists, Royal College of Radiologists, Royal Meteorological Society, Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, Royal Society of Chemistry, St John’s College Research Centre, Science Careers.org, Society for Applied Microbiology, Society for Endocrinology, Society for General Microbiology, The Times, University of Dundee, University of Edinburgh, University of Glasgow, University of St Andrews, University of Stirling, University of West Scotland.

 

Remember many of these Universities get direct funding and profit sharing from their pharmaceutical research.

You gotta hand it to them, the drug companies know how to sell the goods. But what  an ugly business and downright nasty way for drug companies to get their “science” forward. Unfortunately it is not always in the best interest of your health. Explore alternatives like homeopathy, its your right and you’ll be happy you did. And remember, when you hear from these people bashing homeopathy keep in mind who their sponsors are.

Here is something that appeared in the Nursing Online DataBase.

These are just a few excerpts to see the whole thing link here:

Combined wealth of top 5 pharmaceutical companies outweighs GNP of sub-Saharan Africa.: Corporate Watch shows the public just how much wealth big pharmaceutical companies have, even on a global scale. Their report references The Guardian, which found that “the combined worth of the world’s top five drug companies is twice the combined GNP of all sub-Saharan Africa and their influence on the rules of world trade is many times stronger because they can bring their wealth to bear directly on the levers of western power.”

 

Ernesto Bertarelli makes Forbes’ billionaires list: Just as Americans are questioning the record profits and salaries of booming oil companies when they’re forced to accept rising prices at the pump, people may wonder about Ernesto Bertarelli’s billionaire status. Bertarelli is the CEO of the pharmaceutical company Serono, and Forbes reports that his net worth in 2002 reached $8.4 billion. That was enough to place him as the 31st richest person in the world.

 

Academics help pharmaceutical companies conduct research: A new trend in the R&D sector of the pharmaceutical industry features research-based partnerships between academic centers and drug companies. Marcia Angell explains the collaboration by writing that these companies “now ring the major academic research institutions and often carry out the initial phases of drug development, hoping for lucrative deals with big drug companies that can market the new drugs. Usually both academic researchers and their institutions own equity in the biotechnology companies they are involved with,” and everyone can “cash in on the public investment in research.” As academic centers play a more significant role in the success of the drug companies, they are more likely to take on the “entrepreneur” spirit and make profits from patents, royalties and stocks, which can mark up the prices for everyday consumers. 

[Unfortunately these research institutes have become the spawning ground for more and more profit driven drugs. Some are later proven to be seriously problematic and dangerous to the health of millions such as Vioxx and cholesterol lowering drugs more recently.

And the spawners who are threatened then attack homeopathy and homeopaths while remaining passive about their so called "science" based medicine problems. Take note Gimpy, Ben Goldacre and David Colququon and others]

 

Some drug companies are taking advantage of underdeveloped countries to perform clinical trials: Wired.com reports that India is becoming a more attractive place for drug companies to run clinical trials and test out new drugs. The article explains, “more and more drug companies are conducting clinical trials in developing countries where government oversight is more lax and research can be done for a fraction of the cost.” Controversy is starting to build over the trend, however, as one expert explains. Sean Philpott, managing editor of The American Journal of Bioethics, reveals to Wired.com that such practices may be unfair, as “individuals who participate in Indian clinical trials usually won’t be educated. Offering $100 [as payment for their participation] may be undue enticement; they may not even realize that they are being coerced.”

 

 

There are blogs that have been started by various parties interested in promoting drug based medicine. These individuals utilize a kind of “science-based” camaraderie to nix any common sense approach to your medical treatment especially if you choose to go outside of their sphere of influence, ie. alternative health treatments. They don’t really want you to know about these alternatives but rather under the guise of being a “skeptic” would rather you choose pharmaceutical drugs. They like to term anything that does not agree with their schema: “pseudoscience”.

If you look carefully their qualifications include the ability to make 1+million dollar per year income from promoting and prescribing and selling drugs (oncologists can actually sell drugs in the United States and in other countries). I’m sure Vioxx was one of those.

They have a lot to lose if inexpensive medical solutions like homeopathy, acupuncture, chiropractic succeed.