Re: Re - Just curious Chequebook Terrorism

[Guest guest]

Interesting you should pick up such an old message. Our government have just written a major report

The Influence of the Pharmaceutical Industry Published 5 April 2005 by Authority of the House of Commons London

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhealth/42/42.pdf

Amongst other things this report explains how drugs get licensed when most trials show them ineffective.

Doctors are persuaded to write presciptions for drugs not licensed for a particular purpose by articles masquerading as science.

Many deaths have occurred as a result of information being withheld about the know risks of 2 inhibitors Vioxx et al

In the recent week our TV screens have been full of the terrorist evens in London and I am not suggesting that is wrong.

I believe this government report which does not even mention cures suppressed only touches the surface of what is really chequebook terrorism by the pharmaceutical industry. Terrorists would have to stage an even like the World Trade Centre every week to represent anything comparable to the same risk to mankind as the issues raised in the report, never mind those not raised in the report.

The existence of this report has not even been mentioned in the news.

Barry Lynes books on the effect of the repressed information about Rife in his view make the American AMA responsible for the deaths of 40000 Americans a week since 1939 when it was smashed http://www.barrylynes.com/. That figure does not even mention the rest of us.

Codex are going ahead with the restriction of vitamins despite legal advise to the court that this is illegal.

The question is what do we the public do about it? Die quietly I suppose.

Dave

--- Original Message ----- > From: betrue@... > low dose naltrexone > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 12:17 PM> Subject: Re: [low dose naltrexone] Re - Just curious> > Good point, Dave Tayler. I would like to urge everyone crying out for> clinical trials o LDN to please stop!!! The drug has already had clinical> triels and was approved, and the only way to get it off the market is to> make it into an illegal drug and a controlled substance. Then it can be> conhtrolled and made inaccessible.> > I talked to the wife of a renown neurologist in Texas who had been very> infuential in the Ms Society at the national level. She told me she quit> promoting the MS Society when a really high mucky muck told her (secretly)> that no cure for any major disease would ever be found again, using polio as> the example. When polio was 'cured', it took out part of the industry!!! > Since then, I tell everyone to quit walking for MS, etc.> > If there was a clinical trial for LDN, it would cost millions, be made> inaccesible, and then be 'approved' at a much higher cost to cover the cost> of the trials. THI NK, people. A month's supply of it now costs only about> $20-30 a month. People with no insurance and on Medicare can afford that> now. They will not be able to if it goes through clinbical trials. We> don't need clinical trials now. The anecdotal is enough for D.O.s and other> doctors to prescribe it without the trials. Neuros may not because it> jeapordizes their profession. It would empty their offices.> > That is a GOOD thing!> > Jan> > [low dose naltrexone] Re - Just curious> > I think it would be wrong to suggest there is wholesale corruption of> doctors in the medicine they offer. They do get money from drug companies> when they provide records related to the performance of drugs with their> patients, your doctor will get probably get a fee for speaking at various> events including the one you refer to and of course most doctors would be> bright enough to work out that if they pushed something like LDN the> invitations to speak at such events might dry up. These things are of course> financed by drug companies to push their products and lead doctors to> believe that drug companies are behaving responsibly and can be trusted. The> problem to me would seem to be that the only treatments that can be licensed> are those that drug companies apply for a licence for, any treatment that> does not suit their financial system will not be further researched. Their> financial interests are best serve by expensive treatment rather than cures,> if those treatments have side effects that require more drugs to treat then> up go the profits again. As with all professions there will be some doctors> that are incompetent or bent but it is not my view that is the general> situation.> > Dave > >

[Guest guest]

We are running out of time. CAFTA will be voted on in the

house within a few days. It is pure luck that the vote was originally set for

11 July and then postponed. It has already passed the senate! Call your

congressmen, both in your district and the surrounding districts and urge them

to vote against CAFTA because of article 6, CODEX. Get this thing stopped here

and NOW!

Bruce Guilmette, Ph.D.

Survive Cancer Foundation, Inc.

http://www.survivecancer.net

From: low dose naltrexone [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of

Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 5:34

AM

low dose naltrexone

Cc: betrue@...

Subject: Re: [low dose naltrexone]

Re - Just curious Chequebook Terrorism

Interesting you should pick up such an old message. Our government have

just written a major report

The Influence of the Pharmaceutical Industry Published 5 April 2005 by

Authority of the House of Commons London

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhealth/42/42.pdf

Amongst other things this report explains how drugs get

licensed when most trials show them ineffective.

Doctors are persuaded to write presciptions for drugs not

licensed for a particular purpose by articles masquerading as science.

Many deaths have occurred as a result of information being

withheld about the know risks of 2 inhibitors Vioxx et al

In the recent week our TV screens have been full of the

terrorist evens in London

and I am not suggesting that is wrong.

I believe this government report which does not even mention

cures suppressed only touches the surface of what is really chequebook

terrorism by the pharmaceutical industry. Terrorists would have to stage an

even like the World Trade Centre every week to represent anything

comparable to the same risk to mankind as the issues raised in the report,

never mind those not raised in the report.

The existence of this report has not even been mentioned in

the news.

Barry Lynes books on the effect of the repressed information

about Rife in his view make the American AMA responsible for the deaths of

40000 Americans a week since 1939 when it was smashed http://www.barrylynes.com/. That figure

does not even mention the rest of us.

Codex are going ahead with the restriction of vitamins

despite legal advise to the court that this is illegal.

The question is what do we the public do about it? Die

quietly I suppose.

Dave

--- Original Message -----

> From: betrue@...

> low dose naltrexone

> Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 12:17 PM

> Subject: Re: [low dose naltrexone] Re - Just curious

>

> Good point, Dave Tayler. I would like to urge everyone crying out

for

> clinical trials o LDN to please stop!!! The drug has already had

clinical

> triels and was approved, and the only way to get it off the market is to

> make it into an illegal drug and a controlled substance. Then it can

be

> conhtrolled and made inaccessible.

>

> I talked to the wife of a renown neurologist in Texas who had been very

> infuential in the Ms Society at the national level. She told me she

quit

> promoting the MS Society when a really high mucky muck told her (secretly)

> that no cure for any major disease would ever be found again, using polio

as

> the example. When polio was 'cured', it took out part of the industry!!!

> Since then, I tell everyone to quit walking for MS, etc.

>

> If there was a clinical trial for LDN, it would cost millions, be made

> inaccesible, and then be 'approved' at a much higher cost to cover the

cost

> of the trials. THI NK, people. A month's supply of it now

costs only about

> $20-30 a month. People with no insurance and on Medicare can afford

that

> now. They will not be able to if it goes through clinbical

trials. We

> don't need clinical trials now. The anecdotal is enough for D.O.s

and other

> doctors to prescribe it without the trials. Neuros may not because

it

> jeapordizes their profession. It would empty their offices.

>

> That is a GOOD thing!

>

> Jan

>

> [low dose naltrexone] Re - Just curious

>

> I think it would be wrong to suggest there is wholesale corruption of

> doctors in the medicine they offer. They do get money from drug companies

> when they provide records related to the performance of drugs with their

> patients, your doctor will get probably get a fee for speaking at various

> events including the one you refer to and of course most doctors would be

> bright enough to work out that if they pushed something like LDN the

> invitations to speak at such events might dry up. These things are of

course

> financed by drug companies to push their products and lead doctors to

> believe that drug companies are behaving responsibly and can be trusted.

The

> problem to me would seem to be that the only treatments that can be

licensed

> are those that drug companies apply for a licence for, any treatment that

> does not suit their financial system will not be further researched. Their

> financial interests are best serve by expensive treatment rather than

cures,

> if those treatments have side effects that require more drugs to treat

then

> up go the profits again. As with all professions there will be some

doctors

> that are incompetent or bent but it is not my view that is the general

> situation.

>

> Dave

>

>