Most patients are Conspiracy Theorists - believe their doctors are in league with Big Pharma

"(NaturalNews) A new Consumer Reports survey has found that the vast majority of patients on prescription drug medications believe that drug companies have too much influence over their doctors. Roughly half of those interviewed believe that their doctors are so influenced by Big Pharma that they would deliberately write a drug prescription even if a better, safer, non-drug option was available.

Of the nearly 1,200 patients interviewed, nearly half believe that gifts from drug companies influence which drugs their doctors prescribe. And more than 80 percent believe that drug companies offer incentives to doctors to get them to write more prescriptions.

Other concerns include doctors agreeing to be paid spokespersons for drug companies, speaking at drug industry conference and being "wined and dined" by drug company executives in exchange for favors.

According to Dr. Lee Green, these concerns are largely warranted because drug companies are known to participate in this type of unethical behavior. In fact, drug companies have now begun targeting primary care physicians to promote drugs rather than academic doctors because they are easier to convince and manipulate.

The study results are indicative of an overall decline in the public's trust of doctors, which is leading many people to conduct more research on their own about treatment alternatives. But rather than be concerned about the blatant corruption in the medical and drug industries that is causing this phenomenon, some researchers seem more concerned that people might stop taking their medications as a result..."

Full Article

Alleged 'Scientists' Call For Rationing at Cancun Climate Summit

Prof Anderson admitted it “would not be easy” to persuade people to reduce their consumption of goods.

He said politicians should consider a rationing system similar to the one introduced during the last “time of crisis” in the 1930s and 40s.

This could mean a limit on electricity so people are forced to turn the heating down, turn off the lights and replace old electrical goods like huge fridges with more efficient models. Food that has travelled from abroad may be limited and goods that require a lot of energy to manufacture.

“The Second World War and the concept of rationing is something we need to seriously consider if we are to address the scale of the problem we face,” he said.

Prof Anderson insisted that halting growth in the rich world does not necessarily mean a recession or a worse lifestyle, it just means making adjustments in everyday life such as using public transport and wearing a sweater rather than turning on the heating.

“I am not saying we have to go back to living in caves,” he said. “Our emissions were a lot less ten years ago and we got by ok then.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/8165769/Cancun-climate-change-summit-scientists-call-for-rationing-in-developed-world.html

They fly out to exotic locations, just so they can tell you they want to subject you to rationing. It's not because they haven't heard of skype, no, it's because this is the climate religion, where the high priesthood get to travel and eat meat and, I don't know, heat their homes. And you don't, damn filthy humans overpopulating everywhere.

We need a pandemic like Dr Pianka said, that will clean some of you up. Although really Pianka didn't go far enough, the Church of Euthanasia got it right. Visualise voluntary human extinction! I wonder how many of these alleged climate scientists are part of the C of Euth. Do they like to watch the plane coming in?

Cancer is a Man Made Disease, Say Scientists

"Cancer is a man-made disease fuelled by the excesses of modern life, a study of ancient remains has found.

Tumours were rare until recent times when pollution and poor diet became issues, the review of mummies, fossils and classical literature found.

A greater understanding of its origins could lead to treatments for the disease, which claims more than 150,000 lives a year in the UK.

Scientists found no signs of cancer in their extensive study of mummies apart from one isolated case"

Full Article

I wonder if the beginning of eating grains had anything to do with it?

Refined sugar feeds cancer

Oxygen kills cancer (ergo, poor circulation, sedentary lifestyle etc causes cancer)

(Also don't forget that when DU bombs go off in Iraq, just like when nukes go off, little radioactive particles float up into the atmosphere and travel all around the world. For instance, Israel may have been DU-Nuking Palestine for years, but the DU dust comes back across the border and affects Israelis too. How much DU, sent by air mail from Afghanistan, have you breathed in today?)

Nothing guts me more than seeing the cruel hoax of all the cancer 'charities', all that 'pink' nonsense, and 'running for the cure'. Because a lot of well meaning people support these things, thinking it is a good cause. No no, they're not running for the cure, they're running from it!

Go on, try explaining to people that you think cancer charities are a con. It's a sacred cow. How can you be against 'finding a cure for cancer'? Explain yourself.

What kind of sick sick people hoard knowledge about how to prevent/cure cancer, keep most people in the dark about it, deliberately create circumstances where cancer becomes ubiquitous, then hold these cash guzzling cancer charities over the people, teasing them with the prospect of some cure, that if it ever came would break the entire cancer racket?



G Edward Griffin - A World Without Cancer - says cancer is a nutrition deficiency disease, advocates vitamin B17 as a cancer cure/preventative.

Rick Simpson - Run From The Cure - advocates THC as a cancer cure/preventative.

What if they're right?

On Trusting the Corrupt Medical Establishment

Mike Adams interview with Alex Jones
New word: "diseasify". Not sure about the spelling.

This Supermarket "Health Food" Killed These Baby Rats in Three Weeks
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/10/04/watch-out-there-are-more-problems-with-genetically-modified-foods-than-youre-allowed-to-know.aspx

"Biologist Arpad Pusztai had more than 300 articles and 12 books to his credit and was the world’s top expert in his field.

But when he accidentally discovered that genetically modified (GM) foods are dangerous, he became the biotech industry’s bad-boy poster child, setting an example for other scientists thinking about blowing the whistle.

In the early 1990s, Dr. Pusztai was awarded a $3 million grant by the UK government to design the system for safety testing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). His team included more than 20 scientists working at three facilities, including the Rowett Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland, the top nutritional research lab in the UK, and his employer for the previous 35 years.

The results of Pusztai’s work were supposed to become the required testing protocols for all of Europe. But when he fed supposedly harmless GM potatoes to rats, things didn’t go as planned.

Within just 10 days, the animals developed potentially pre-cancerous cell growth, smaller brains, livers, and testicles, partially atrophied livers, and damaged immune systems. Moreover, the cause was almost certainly side effects from the process of genetic engineering itself. In other words, the GM foods on the market, which are created from the same process, might have similar affects on humans.

With permission from his director, Pusztai was interviewed on TV and expressed his concerns about GM foods. He became a hero at his institute -- for two days.

Then came the phone calls from the pro-GMO prime minister’s office to the institute’s director. The next morning, Pusztai was fired. He was silenced with threats of a lawsuit, his team was dismantled, and the protocols never implemented. His Institute, the biotech industry, and the UK government, together launched a smear campaign to destroy Pusztai’s reputation.

Eventually, an invitation to speak before Parliament lifted his gag order and his research was published in the prestigious Lancet. No similar in-depth studies have yet tested the GM foods eaten every day by Americans."

"There is NO PROOF that AIDS, which first appeared EXCLUSIVELY in young (primarily white) gay men in Manhattan, came from Africa. This is yet another myth about AIDS. How could a supposed black heterosexual African epidemic transform itself into an EXCLUSIVELY WHITE YOUNG GAY MENS' DISEASE IN MANHATTAN?"

Merck scientist jokes that their vaccine projects were the probable source of AIDS. Oh it's so funny! Side splitting!

"In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it is just as bad not to say it."
J. Cousteau, 1991 explorer and UNESCO courier

"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent." - Bill Gates

Live cancer viruses in polio vacccines. Of course that was just in the past.

Now?
"parents or guardians have a duty of social and individual order to giving their children for vaccination as often as necessary"

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2010/10/ukrainian-people-say-no-to-globalist.html

CDC Covers Up Over 1500 Miscarriages From H1N1 Vaccine

"A shocking report from the National Coalition of Organized Women (NCOW) presented data from two different sources demonstrating that the 2009/10 H1N1 vaccines contributed to an estimated 1,588 miscarriages and stillbirths. A corrected estimate may be as high as 3,587 cases. NCOW also highlights the disturbing fact that the CDC failed to inform their vaccine providers of the incoming data of the reports of suspected H1N1 vaccine related fetal demise."

Full Article

Flashback:

"Is the 2009 H1N1 flu shot safe for pregnant women?
The seasonal flu shot has been given to millions of pregnant women over many years. Flu shots have not been shown to cause harm to pregnant women or their babies. The 2009 H1N1 flu vaccine is being made in the same way and at the same places where the seasonal flu vaccine is made." (source)

Pregnant women were specifically targeted by the h1n1 vaccine campaign. (image source)

Two Green Movements

Or, if you prefer, two strands within the green movement.

One is the movement of self sufficiency and independence. Of "getting off the grid" and "food security", "anti-corporatism" and "low impact living". A big threat to the centralised, interdependent control grid.

The other is of course the CO2penhagen Commies, or Watermelons if you prefer.

So has the latter sabotaged the former?

I almost feel like the Carbon Commies backed down a little too easily after Copenhagen/Climategate. This Lord Monckton shows up, oh I don't doubt his sincerity but remember all the world's a stage, and within literally a few months, the whole game has changed and the CO2phobes are running away with their tales between their legs and wads of cash stuffed inside their Fair Trade sandals.

Warum?

That's not like the usually audacious NWO to run like that. Now the old media is having to admit, well, we were shitting you all this time about boiling oceans, drowning polar bears et al. Not so blatantly but you get what I'm saying, they're backing off.

Is/was the green movement becoming a threat?

That's the beauty of these movements. Like the Tea Party. You try and control them, place your people at the helm, weed out the "extremist lunatic conspiracy theorists" (ie real deal anti NWO people), but they defragment and reform somewhere else; it must be like playing occultist whac-a-mole.

The genuine environmental movement should be, and frankly for the most part among ordinary people is, pro independence and self sovereignty, and utterly non Commie. Maybe, just maybe, they have been Tango'd.

And it takes two to tango.

Lord Monckton Wins Oxford Global Warming Debate

"For what is believed to be the first time ever in England, an audience of university undergraduates has decisively rejected the notion that “global warming” is or could become a global crisis. The only previous defeat for climate extremism among an undergraduate audience was at St. Andrew’s University, Scotland, in the spring of 2009, when the climate extremists were defeated by three votes.

Last week, members of the historic Oxford Union Society, the world’s premier debating society, carried the motion “That this House would put economic growth before combating climate change” by 135 votes to 110"...

Full Article

Climate Fears Turn To Doubts Among Britons
by Elisabeth Rosenthal for the New York Times

"LONDON — Last month hundreds of environmental activists crammed into an auditorium here to ponder an anguished question: If the scientific consensus on climate change has not changed, why have so many people turned away from the idea that human activity is warming the planet?

Nowhere has this shift in public opinion been more striking than in Britain, where climate change was until this year such a popular priority that in 2008 Parliament enshrined targets for emissions cuts as national law. But since then, the country has evolved into a home base for a thriving group of climate skeptics who have dominated news reports in recent months, apparently convincing many that the threat of warming is vastly exaggerated.

A survey in February by the BBC found that only 26 percent of Britons believed that “climate change is happening and is now established as largely manmade,” down from 41 percent in November 2009. A poll conducted for the German magazine Der Spiegel found that 42 percent of Germans feared global warming, down from 62 percent four years earlier.

And London’s Science Museum recently announced that a permanent exhibit scheduled to open later this year would be called the Climate Science Gallery — not the Climate Change Gallery as had previously been planned.

“Before, I thought, ‘Oh my God, this climate change problem is just dreadful,’ ” said Jillian Leddra, 50, a musician who was shopping in London on a recent lunch hour. “But now I have my doubts, and I’m wondering if it’s been overhyped.”

Perhaps sensing that climate is now a political nonstarter, David Cameron, Britain’s new Conservative prime minister, was “strangely muted” on the issue in a recent pre-election debate, as The Daily Telegraph put it, though it had previously been one of his passions.

And a poll in January of the personal priorities of 141 Conservative Party candidates deemed capable of victory in the recent election found that “reducing Britain’s carbon footprint” was the least important of the 19 issues presented to them..."

Full Article

Haha...they're running away...enjoy it for just one moment. Breathe it in.

Now never forget who is behind the AGW watermelon because they have half a hundred other scams in progress to sell you into slavery. They will fabricate or genuinely cause other envirocrimes, such as this terrible gulf oil 'accident' which will be used to shaft us with the green agenda any way. The green agenda is banana republic/medieval feudalism. No more industry except military and surveillance. Labour, microchipped peasant.

Counterthink - Business Is Booming

The Sick Care Economy

30 Million Kids Shot Up With Pig Virus

Another victory for global vaccination campaigns! I say, get yours NOW.

Rotarix rotavirus vaccine contaminated, officials say

Federal health authorities recommended Monday that doctors suspend using Rotarix, one of two vaccines licensed in the United States against rotavirus, saying the vaccine is contaminated with material from a pig virus.

"There is no evidence at this time that this material poses a safety risk," Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg told reporters in a conference call.

Rotarix, made by GlaxoSmithKline, was approved by the FDA in 2008. The contaminant material is DNA from porcine circovirus 1, a virus from pigs that is not known to cause disease in humans or animals, Hamburg said.

About 1 million children in the United States and about 30 million worldwide have gotten Rotarix vaccine, she said.

Those damn anti-vaccine conspiracy nuts who know that elitist Bertrand Russell foresaw the use of vaccines as eugenics weapons in "The Impact of Science on Society". [I quote, and take some time to see the full implications of this; "Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable"]

Those paranoid loons who realise that Merck scientists have been interviewed joking about how their vaccine programmes were a probable origin of AIDS.

Ever notice how the people who don't ever get vaccinated are the healthiest? But that isn't 'scientific'; you have to trust the word of some white coated 'expert' over your own experience.

Truly 'sceptical', truly 'scientific' people realise the importance of mass vaccination. Because chemically retarded citizens, are obedient citizens!

Or, as Bertrand Russell himself said, "Most people would rather die than think; in fact, they do so."

Vaccines did not save us - 2 centuries of official statistics

(N)ever (A) (S)traight (A)nswer

by Steve Candidus for LewRockwell.com

At least once a week I get an email from someone forwarding what they claim to be irrefutable proof that we never landed our Apollo astronauts on the moon and that the whole thing was faked.

With NASA back in the news this time as a make-work "Jobs Program" – everyone desperately trying to keep from having to find productive work in the private sector – I thought that perhaps I would add my own voice to the debate.

I believe that the question about whether or not the US actually landed on the moon is simply another version of the same old government tactic:

"…If they can get people asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about their answers…"

I think that the probability that we ‘faked’ the whole thing is pretty remote. My reason is simple. I believe that with existing technology that it was doable in the 1960’s and it would be a lot safer to do it if possible than to risk faking it unnecessarily.

Besides, our federal agencies were all plenty busy. Just think about everything that they had on their plates at that time: Covering their tracks after killing JFK in broad daylight just a few years earlier. Creating a war in Vietnam, escalating tensions in the cold war, in Cuba, toppling duly elected governments worldwide, spying on their fellow Americans, – hey, these guys were busy.

A more likely scenario to the moon landing debate is that this whole question has surfaced out of what are some very clearly ‘touched up’ photos from those moon landings and from NASA’s steadfast refusal to release the original copies. Did you know that? NASA absolutely refuses to release the original photos. And here we all thought that ‘we the people’ owned them – silly us.

The truth is that as an arm of the federal government NASA is and always has been just another venue for government propaganda and the promotion of the government line. It is also and always has been a part of the Defense Department’s fantasies and desires, and both the CIA’s and the National Security Agency’s spy satellites are supported by NASA.

Lesser known and seemingly separate is the fact that NASA is also one of the personal playthings of the US government (public) school teachers and college professors. Government school teachers have a symbiotic relationship with NASA that is not unlike the one they share with professional sports. They all promote and support each other. Not surprisingly none of them ever met a government program, law, restriction, abuse, or tax that they didn’t embrace and even adore.

What this all adds up to of course is that the information that gets released to the public is only that which serves NASA itself, the supporting federal agencies and all of those promoting them for their own ends – like the mainstream news media.

With that in mind, if you look at some of the photos that NASA has released of our moon landings objectively you will see some that show the side of the lunar lander that is in shadow. Even though in the dark the American flag and the words UNITED STATES are always clearly visible as if lit. That is impossible. That is clearly an enhancement of the photos.

It reminds me of those photos that the USSR used to release showing one of their air aces stepping out of his plane immediately after shooting down a half a dozen German Messerschmitts in a horrific air battle. The good pilots were often shown not in their flying suites covered with grime, but in full dress uniform, covered with medals and their entire ground crews all cleaned and pressed and smiling for the camera. Remember how we used to laugh at such obviously staged photos?

The NASA lunar landing photos are much the same. I expect that they enhanced them not because we didn’t land on the moon, but just to make sure that the American flag and THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA was prominently displayed in every picture. It was simply more propaganda by another federal agency that specializes in it.

The proper questions that we should be asking then regarding the Apollo moon landings are:

"…Why did NASA alter or enhance the photos?..."

"…On whose orders did they do that?..."

The trouble with having those questions asked though is that they might lead to even more dangerous questions such as:

"…If NASA faked or changed some of the lunar landing photos then what else has NASA done and lied about?..."

"…What is NASA doing and lying to us about now?..."

Those of course are questions that the ruling elite simply can not allow to be asked. That would be to let the toothpaste out of the tube and they know that it’s virtually impossible to get it back inside once released.

NASA is hardly the squeaky clean "civilian" organization that it has always been promoted to the public to be by school teachers, the mainstream media, politicians, et al. It’s a lot worse now than it was during the Apollo program, but so is every other federal agency.

In the final analysis NASA is made up of just another bunch of political hacks that do as they’re told by their masters. Witness the fact that they’ve been involved in promoting the global warming scam up to their collective necks.

Full Article

Further research:
- Nazi background to NASA (Project Paperclip after WW2 brought top Nazis, including scientists, covertly into the Americas especially the US, hence why some people call modern America the 'Fourth Reich')
- The Telegraph think they've debunked the moon landing hoax thing. Even with my limited understanding of this complex topic (yes this literally is 'rocket science' sometimes), I know they have missed out or avoided the alleged photographic evidence which points to a possible hoax.

The Potential for 'Mental Health' Tyranny

Recently we have seen a large number of media pieces intended to suggest people with certain views or convictions are in fact suffering from a mental 'problem'. See these examples:

The several varieties of gun nuts (via Conservative Scalawag)

WND: Veteran psychiatrist calls liberals mentally ill

CNN: Conspiracy Theorists Are Potential "Suicide Warriors" & Are Mentally Disturbed

Psychology Today piece links 'conspiracy thinking' to mental illness

Telegraph: Climate 'denial' is now a mental disorder

Mothers' Act: Branding pregnancy as mental illness

ABC News: As Conspiracy Communities Grow, Mental Health Docs Left With Big Questions

Brisbane Times: Mental illness affects four out of five

First of all let me get the obvious out of the way: drug companies and their cartel friends in government make a killing out of mental illness, and are more than happy to make new ones up for their own financial gain. But that's not the only motive for this.

The broadening of the interpretation of what is 'mental illness' presents a threat to our freedoms because it may allow governments to classify their political enemies (that is, the people) as insane or mentally ill, and dangerous. Now currently we have a system that locks away people who are deemed clinically insane and a danger to the public. I'm not saying that is completely a good or bad thing; it is what it is. But it is the potential, again I must stress, that tyrannical government may broaden the definition of mental illness for its own ends. It's just another angle to be aware of, from which what relative freedom we have today may be attacked.

Oh and just so you know, I don't believe psychiatrists to be our friends...
http://www.tuberose.com/Psychiatric_Insanity.html
...but that probably means that I am the one who is 'insane' and needs to be diagnosed by them and drugged.

Nice how their sick little mind control game works, isn't it? (Of course, they aren't the mentally ill ones, no sir not at all...)

Reminder: plenty of Conspiracy Theories have been proven to be true, here's 33 of them. So really the biggest 'mental illness', if you want to call it that, is that which afflicts the 'see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil' MSM-worshipping section of the population.

"What do you mean the CIA got visas for the 9/11 hijackers? Paranoia! Paranoia! Those people are insane!"

"Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. ... I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it." - John Lennon

Climategate: the aftermath

Nature - Climate of Fear

The integrity of climate research has taken a very public battering in recent months. Scientists must now emphasize the science, while acknowledging that they are in a street fight.

Climate scientists are on the defensive, knocked off balance by a re-energized community of global-warming deniers who, by dominating the media agenda, are sowing doubts about the fundamental science. Most researchers find themselves completely out of their league in this kind of battle because it's only superficially about the science. The real goal is to stoke the angry fires of talk radio, cable news, the blogosphere and the like, all of which feed off of contrarian story lines and seldom make the time to assess facts and weigh evidence. Civility, honesty, fact and perspective are irrelevant.

Worse, the onslaught seems to be working: some polls in the United States and abroad suggest that it is eroding public confidence in climate science at a time when the fundamental understanding of the climate system, although far from complete, is stronger than ever. Ecologist Paul Ehrlich at Stanford University in California says that his climate colleagues are at a loss about how to counter the attacks. “Everyone is scared shitless, but they don't know what to do,” he says.

For a larger dose of their delicious propaganda click here

Re article above - since when did GW 'deniers' dominate the media agenda? Flick on your telescreens; what kind of coverage have they provided of Climategate? Not bloody much. The media pushes the global warming-global governance agenda because that's where the (carbon tax) money is.

Gallup - Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop

Most Doctors Would Refuse Chemotherapy on Themselves

But they administer chemo to others...

by Dr T Simoncini (oncologist)

The great lack of trust is evident even amongst doctors. Polls and questionnaires show that three doctors out of four (75 per cent) would refuse any chemotherapy because of its ineffectiveness against the disease and its devastating effects on the entire human organism. This is what many doctors and scientists have to say about chemotherapy:

“The majority of the cancer patients in this country die because of chemotherapy, which does not cure breast, colon or lung cancer. This has been documented for over a decade and nevertheless doctors still utilize chemotherapy to fight these tumors.” (Allen Levin, MD, UCSF, “The Healing of Cancer”, Marcus Books, 1990).

“If I were to contract cancer, I would never turn to a certain standard for the therapy of this disease. Cancer patients who stay away from these centers have some chance to make it.” (Prof. Gorge Mathe, “Scientific Medicine Stymied”, Medicines Nouvelles, Paris, 1989)

“Dr. Hardin Jones, lecturer at the University of California, after having analyzed for many decades statistics on cancer survival, has come to this conclusion: ‘… when not treated, the patients do not get worse or they even get better’. The unsettling conclusions of Dr. Jones have never been refuted”. (Walter Last, “The Ecologist”, Vol. 28, no. 2, March-April 1998)

“Many oncologists recommend chemotherapy for almost any type of cancer, with a faith that is unshaken by the almost constant failures”.(Albert Braverman, MD, “Medical Oncology in the 90s”, Lancet, 1991, Vol. 337, p. 901)

“Our most efficacious regimens are loaded with risks, side effects and practical problems; and after all the patients we have treated have paid the toll, only a miniscule percentage of them is paid off with an ephemeral period of tumoral regression and generally a partial one” (Edward G. Griffin “World Without Cancer”, American Media Publications, 1996)

“After all, and for the overwhelming majority of the cases, there is no proof whatsoever that chemotherapy prolongs survival expectations. And this is the great lie about this therapy, that there is a correlation between the reduction of cancer and the extension of the life of the patient”. (Philip Day, “Cancer: Why we’re still dying to know the truth”, Credence Publications, 2000)

“Several full-time scientists at the McGill Cancer Center sent to 118 doctors, all experts on lung cancer, a questionnaire to determine the level of trust they had in the therapies they were applying; they were asked to imagine that they themselves had contracted the disease and which of the six current experimental therapies they would choose. 79 doctors answered, 64 of them said that they would not consent to undergo any treatment containing cis-platinum – one of the common chemotherapy drugs they used – while 58 out of 79 believed that all the experimental therapies above were not accepted because of the ineffectiveness and the elevated level of toxicity of chemotherapy.” (Philip Day, “Cancer: Why we’re still dying to know the truth”, Credence Publications, 2000)

“Doctor Ulrich Able, a German epidemiologist of the Heidelberg Mannheim Tumor Clinic, has exhaustively analyzed and reviewed all the main studies and clinical experiments ever performed on chemotherapy .... Able discovered that the comprehensive world rate of positive outcomes because of chemotherapy was frightening, because, simply, nowhere was scientific evidence available demonstrating that chemotherapy is able to ‘prolong in any appreciable way the life of patients affected by the most common type of organ cancer.’ Able highlights that rarely can chemotherapy improve the quality of life, and he describes it as a scientific squalor while maintaining that at least 80 per cent of chemotherapy administered in the world is worthless. Even if there is no scientific proof whatsoever that chemotherapy works, neither doctors nor patients are prepared to give it up (Lancet, Aug. 10, 1991). None of the main media has ever mentioned this exhaustive study: it has been completely buried” (Tim O’Shea, “Chemotherapy – An Unproven Procedure”)

“According to medical associations, the notorious and dangerous side effects of drugs have become the fourth main cause of death after infarction, cancer, and apoplexy” ( Journal of the American Medical Association, April 15, 1998)

http://www.curenaturalicancro.com/2-physicians-refuse-chemo.html

How to Eradicate a Disease - Change Its Name

Is he right? Was polio never really eradicated? Read for yourself.
http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/30947-how-to-eradicate-a-disease-

Toyota vs Big Pharma

Who is more dangerous to the consumer?

Natural News - Toyota's consumer safety problems are dwarfed by body count of Big Pharma's deadly drugs

Sure, Toyota made some engineering or manufacturing mistakes. But in Toyota's case, that's a rare departure from its longstanding core philosophy of quality and safety. For Big Pharma, ducking responsibility and selling dangerous products is the status quo -- it's the way the drug industry does business every single day: Bribing researchers, falsifying data, overbilling state Medicaid programs, bilking consumers with monopoly pricing, burying negative studies that it doesn't want the public to see, paying doctors "consulting fees" to prescribe more of its name-brand drugs, and so on. This is business as usual in the pharmaceutical industry.

Michael Mann as innocent as OJ

more James Delingpole genius

Michael Mann as innocent as OJ – possibly more so – finds internal Penn State investigation

Penn State University has completed its internal investigation into potential wrongdoing by its star professor Michael Mann, creator of the most discredited graph in scientific history – the incredible, completely made-up Hockey Stick.

And guess what? Turns out the guy hasn’t done anything wrong at all.

Well, probably. There’s one area, the University has decided, which merits closer investigation:

“Decision 4. Given that information emerged in the form of the emails purloined from CRU in November 2009, which have raised questions in the public’s mind about Dr. Mann’s conduct of his research activity, given that this may be undermining confidence in his findings as a scientist, and given that it may be undermining public trust in science in general and climate science specifically, the inquiry committee believes an investigatory committee of faculty peers from diverse fields should be constituted under RA-10 to further consider this allegation.”

And what do you reckon their eventual conclusion is going to be? As robust as SUNY Albany’s response to Doug Keenan’s allegations of wrongdoing by Professor Wei-Chyung Wang, perhaps? Or as forthright as the Information Commissioner’s response to lawbreaking at the Climatic Research Institute?

I know in the past I’ve been optimistic about the possibility of prosecutions arising from the myriad cases of alleged fraud exposed by Climategate. Instead, what we’re seeing both at scientific institutions and in government is a closing of ranks, and a fierce determination that regardless of evidence or reason the AGW gravy train must roll on at all costs and that no guilt should be admitted by any of the offending parties.