According to
Los Angeles Times, California Association of Physicians and Surgeons, and even Center for Diseases Control’s own admission, well over 100,000 people in this country die each year from “properly” administered prescription drugs. This is absolutely shocking! One study has shown that more than two million American hospitalized patients suffered a serious adverse drug reaction (ADR) within a 12-month period and of these, over 100,000 died as a result. Likewise, roughly 36,000,000 adverse drug reactions are reported annually, resulting in more than 33.6-million admissions or hospitalizations all from drugs that FDA has pronounced “safe effective.” Sources for these statistics can be found at: http://www.cancure.org/medical_errors.htm.
The media is not doing a very good job of reporting this ADR crisis. Instead, we hear constant media drumbeat about dangers of firearms, which are currently politically incorrect yet represent a miniscule fraction of deaths in this country. Doctors who want to politicize gun deaths should clean up their own glass houses first. The real crisis is failing health care or more accurately described as sick care system. There are numerous reasons for this crisis.
One reason is that conflicts of interest represent a very real problem for public servants and those entities which have relationships with various government agencies. Numerous researchers have reported that FDA receives money from very entities it is suppose to be regulating and one consequence of this is suppression rather than advancement of disease cures. Consider following:
“According to a USA Today study, more than half of experts hired to advise government on safety and effectiveness of medicine have financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies that will be helped or hurt by their decisions. These experts are hired to advise Food and Drug Administration on which medicines should be approved for sale, what warning labels should say and how studies of drugs should be designed. The experts are supposed to be independent, but USA TODAY found that 54% of time, they have a direct financial interest in drug or topic they are asked to evaluate. These conflicts include helping a pharmaceutical company develop a medicine, then serving on an FDA advisory committee that judges drug.
The conflicts typically include stock ownership, consulting fees or research grants.
Federal law generally prohibits FDA from using experts with financial conflicts of interest, but according to article, FDA has waived restriction more than 800 times since 1998.” (1)
The corruption of undisclosed financial ties to pharmaceutical companies by supposedly unbiased researchers along with staggering cost involved in bringing new drugs to market, which conveniently eliminates competition from all but cartel heavyweights has been sparingly reported in mainstream press. Consider one exception to this silence:
In book a “World Without Cancer” by G. Edward Griffin. Griffin describes politics of cancer therapy, in which he blows lid off all powerful international chemical and drug cartel that has dominated direction of health care since early in Twentieth Century in United States. Griffin argues that not only has Rockefeller-Farben cartel (2) been instrumental in fostering chemical based drug treatment as basis for health care and they have been dominant adversary against safer non-drug treatments. If Griffin is correct, who is FDA protecting and serving? Clearly, not consumer!
