Wait, what!? “The drug and device industries are for-profit and will continue to maximize income – USUALLY THIS SERVES THE COMMON GOOD, BUT NOT ALWAYS ” —this is laughable when one so often reads many authors pharmaceutical sponsorships.
Adam, I totally agree with you only my view would be darker/more cynical.
Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, wrote that “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” (2). Excerpt from:
From the person who edited the New England Journal of Medicine for 2 decades:
“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 editor of The New England Journal of Medicine” (1).
Then there's the fact that if, for example, Moderna develops a medicine or product, Moderna is the one who funds the "safety studies" of the product. Moderna is the only one to see the raw data. Moderna is the only one who "interprets" the data. Madness! It's leaving the fox in charge of the henhouse. So many people don't know that that's how it works. And then there's the fine art of manipulating the outcome. So if I'm in the group that gets the drug, and not the placebo, in an 8 week trial and I bail by week 4 because of whatever side effect is too miserable to endure, I am not included in the final result. I am excluded, and coded as noncompliant. Utter nonsense.
The makers of TMS, transcranial magnetic stimulation, which is used for severe so-called "treatment resistant" depression excluded severely depressed people from their clinical trials, thus enabling them to report a "success rate" that exceeds what people find in real life trials of the method.
Why do we blame the “ institutions “ or the “ companies “ or the “ government “? Because they are faceless and not many persons in power or in administrative positions have the character needed to call it for what it is, show the people who/what/where it went wrong and direct the corrective action. Plus, penalize the ones who wronged them. Thus the whistleblower protections etc. Definitely a double-edged sword but, it is what we have.
Robert, respectfully: whistleblower protections are of little use when you are dead, as happened to Christine Cotton, found dead hours after publishing her covid vax fraud allegations.
Another doctor who was just about to testify re: covid vax harms: also found dead. It happens more than you'd think.
Whistleblower protections were of absolutely no help whatsoever to Dr Robert Malone, Dr Pierre Kory, Dr Peter McCullough, and a multitude of others who were the first to speak out publicly about the high rate of adverse effects that they were observing in people who had received the covid vax. Sure, many of the doctors who lost their jobs have since, through legal proceedings, had a judge court order their employer to reinstate them with back pay.
But that is of no help in the time when they were without income and needed to pay bills like anyone else, nor would it help the emotional fall out from having your name dragged the mud as you are accused of spreading "misinformation" or "disinformation" (which as far as I can tell is anything "you" say that "I" don't like or agree with).
Other harms result as well. Dr. Joseph Mercola (another outspoken alternatively minded Dr) found, during the pandemic, that the financial institution with whom he'd been banking for a long time suddenly, without stating a reason, was no longer willing to serve him. They were also no longer willing to have his immediate family members as their clients - again, no reason stated.
The documentary an Inconvenient Study, linked here
is eye opening about the culture of fear/intimidation/threat/bullying that surrounds the world of medical research.
Dr. Zervos at the Henry Ford Foundation (the same Dr who was very prominent around the Flint Michigan water crisis) did a large retrospective study looking at health outcomes in a large cohort of fully vaccinated children as compared to a large cohort of fully unvaccinated children. In advance of doing the study, he promised to publish the results no matter what the outcome showed.
The study's outcome was not what Dr. Zervos had anticipated. He then declined to publish it.
Documentary film maker Del Bigtree includes in the film recorded conversations between him and Dr. Zervos. Del asks him if there were any flaws in the study's design or methodology, "is there any way at all that this study could have been made better?" Dr. Zervos says no, there really would be no way to improve upon the study.
Del then asks him "why are you not publishing it as you promised in advance that you would?""
Dr. Zervos says that publishing the study "is the right thing to do" but that the only result would be "me losing my job," says that "I'm not a good person . . . .I can't handle it . .. I don't want them to do to me what they did to (Dr) McCullough and (Dr) Malone . .." and says that he's near the end of his career, just wants to ride it out peacefully, and not get dragged through the mud. The word censorship is used, Dr. Zervos acknowledges that censorship is a part of the current culture of medical research.
Listen for the part I just quoted at 1:04 (and if you are pressed for time go to 1:08)
Doctors McCoullough and Malone were ostracized, ridiculed, and McCullough had some of his certifications stripped (not the same as losing his license to practice medicine, that is still intact).
We blame "the government" because although our government is not transparent about it in the way that the government of China is, censorship is alive and well in our country.
Think about it. If you google a result, someone/something behind the scenes determined what google's opinion or thought is. Ever notice how closely it aligns with Pharma, and against any alternative medicine?
And then there's the fact that the major news media outlets derive more than 50% of their funding from Pharma companies. Many people are unaware of that, but it's no secret - you can look it up. And then that, naturally, shapes what the news reports on and the slant or bias of those reports.
RFK wrote a book called "The Real Anthony Fauci". It has sold over one million copies since publication.
Jill Biden wrote a book that has sold fewer than 50,000 copies.
Why, then, was Biden's book #1 on the NYT bestseller list, but RFK's book never was?
Diana - thank you for your comment. You are absolutely correct - a problem for many years - but sadly, reform made more difficult because of the Trump administration. Engaging with the scientific community is very difficult, when much of what you do undermines science. HCB
All excellent points. The digs at the current administration aren't necessary, though. This has been a growing problem for the past fifty years or more. If the Trump presidency is a catalyst for correction, take that as an opportunity for much-needed reform that ought not to be kicked down the road again.
Wait, what!? “The drug and device industries are for-profit and will continue to maximize income – USUALLY THIS SERVES THE COMMON GOOD, BUT NOT ALWAYS ” —this is laughable when one so often reads many authors pharmaceutical sponsorships.
Also laughable is Bauchner’s TDS.
Adam, I totally agree with you only my view would be darker/more cynical.
Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, wrote that “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” (2). Excerpt from:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4572812/
From the person who edited the New England Journal of Medicine for 2 decades:
“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 editor of The New England Journal of Medicine” (1).
Then there's the fact that if, for example, Moderna develops a medicine or product, Moderna is the one who funds the "safety studies" of the product. Moderna is the only one to see the raw data. Moderna is the only one who "interprets" the data. Madness! It's leaving the fox in charge of the henhouse. So many people don't know that that's how it works. And then there's the fine art of manipulating the outcome. So if I'm in the group that gets the drug, and not the placebo, in an 8 week trial and I bail by week 4 because of whatever side effect is too miserable to endure, I am not included in the final result. I am excluded, and coded as noncompliant. Utter nonsense.
The makers of TMS, transcranial magnetic stimulation, which is used for severe so-called "treatment resistant" depression excluded severely depressed people from their clinical trials, thus enabling them to report a "success rate" that exceeds what people find in real life trials of the method.
It's endless.
Why do we blame the “ institutions “ or the “ companies “ or the “ government “? Because they are faceless and not many persons in power or in administrative positions have the character needed to call it for what it is, show the people who/what/where it went wrong and direct the corrective action. Plus, penalize the ones who wronged them. Thus the whistleblower protections etc. Definitely a double-edged sword but, it is what we have.
Robert, respectfully: whistleblower protections are of little use when you are dead, as happened to Christine Cotton, found dead hours after publishing her covid vax fraud allegations.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-200355015
Another doctor who was just about to testify re: covid vax harms: also found dead. It happens more than you'd think.
Whistleblower protections were of absolutely no help whatsoever to Dr Robert Malone, Dr Pierre Kory, Dr Peter McCullough, and a multitude of others who were the first to speak out publicly about the high rate of adverse effects that they were observing in people who had received the covid vax. Sure, many of the doctors who lost their jobs have since, through legal proceedings, had a judge court order their employer to reinstate them with back pay.
But that is of no help in the time when they were without income and needed to pay bills like anyone else, nor would it help the emotional fall out from having your name dragged the mud as you are accused of spreading "misinformation" or "disinformation" (which as far as I can tell is anything "you" say that "I" don't like or agree with).
Other harms result as well. Dr. Joseph Mercola (another outspoken alternatively minded Dr) found, during the pandemic, that the financial institution with whom he'd been banking for a long time suddenly, without stating a reason, was no longer willing to serve him. They were also no longer willing to have his immediate family members as their clients - again, no reason stated.
The documentary an Inconvenient Study, linked here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvEuMMAafF8&t=102s
is eye opening about the culture of fear/intimidation/threat/bullying that surrounds the world of medical research.
Dr. Zervos at the Henry Ford Foundation (the same Dr who was very prominent around the Flint Michigan water crisis) did a large retrospective study looking at health outcomes in a large cohort of fully vaccinated children as compared to a large cohort of fully unvaccinated children. In advance of doing the study, he promised to publish the results no matter what the outcome showed.
The study's outcome was not what Dr. Zervos had anticipated. He then declined to publish it.
Documentary film maker Del Bigtree includes in the film recorded conversations between him and Dr. Zervos. Del asks him if there were any flaws in the study's design or methodology, "is there any way at all that this study could have been made better?" Dr. Zervos says no, there really would be no way to improve upon the study.
Del then asks him "why are you not publishing it as you promised in advance that you would?""
Dr. Zervos says that publishing the study "is the right thing to do" but that the only result would be "me losing my job," says that "I'm not a good person . . . .I can't handle it . .. I don't want them to do to me what they did to (Dr) McCullough and (Dr) Malone . .." and says that he's near the end of his career, just wants to ride it out peacefully, and not get dragged through the mud. The word censorship is used, Dr. Zervos acknowledges that censorship is a part of the current culture of medical research.
Listen for the part I just quoted at 1:04 (and if you are pressed for time go to 1:08)
Doctors McCoullough and Malone were ostracized, ridiculed, and McCullough had some of his certifications stripped (not the same as losing his license to practice medicine, that is still intact).
We blame "the government" because although our government is not transparent about it in the way that the government of China is, censorship is alive and well in our country.
Think about it. If you google a result, someone/something behind the scenes determined what google's opinion or thought is. Ever notice how closely it aligns with Pharma, and against any alternative medicine?
And then there's the fact that the major news media outlets derive more than 50% of their funding from Pharma companies. Many people are unaware of that, but it's no secret - you can look it up. And then that, naturally, shapes what the news reports on and the slant or bias of those reports.
RFK wrote a book called "The Real Anthony Fauci". It has sold over one million copies since publication.
Jill Biden wrote a book that has sold fewer than 50,000 copies.
Why, then, was Biden's book #1 on the NYT bestseller list, but RFK's book never was?
Hmmmm.
You made my case more eloquently. The problem starts and ends with the individual.
I will summarize the article so you don't have to waste your time .......
"There are a lot of things going wrong. All the key players have been making mistakes and have to do things differently. And it is Trump's fault"
Diana - thank you for your comment. You are absolutely correct - a problem for many years - but sadly, reform made more difficult because of the Trump administration. Engaging with the scientific community is very difficult, when much of what you do undermines science. HCB
I don't think Diana meant what you thought she meant
All excellent points. The digs at the current administration aren't necessary, though. This has been a growing problem for the past fifty years or more. If the Trump presidency is a catalyst for correction, take that as an opportunity for much-needed reform that ought not to be kicked down the road again.