It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


There Are No Drug Company Conspiracies.

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 12:46 PM
I have noticed going through the various threads that there seems to be a huge mistrust among ATSters and pharmacological companies. Most of these theories fall into two camps the first that say the drugs are really bad for you in some way, and the second saying that the pharmaceutical complains are deliberately preventing cure of diseases for financial reasons. I think almost any conspiracy surrounding pharmacological companies is wrong, and no i don’t work for one, but let me explain.

The idea that pharmaceutical companies are deliberately harming the people they are treatment makes for a fantastic conspiracy however that is all it is. There is a vast difference between what is “conspiracy theory” and what is “reality” and the reality is that there is no way, even if they wanted to that pharmaceutical companies would deliberately harm the health of their customers, the patients. First off all for this to be the case every doctor would have to be in on the conspiracy otherwise they would start asking very quickly “ why is my patient’s health not improving” and this would lead to the conspiracy being exposed.

Any conspiracy that suggests that drugs given by a doctor are secretly designed to harm health or otherwise compromise your way of life is dangers. Some people may read such a conspiracy and believe it this in turn could lead to them going off any medication the need and as a result there health will deteriorate and it may even lead to death. Another danger of such conspiracies is that people who are ill develop a mistrust of health care services and refuse to seek treatment and suffer without medical care; again this may lead to death. Some of you reading this may think this is a exaggeration, I would point to a story i heard some years ago about a vegan who refused to use any drug that had been tested on animals and she eventually died.

Then we have those who say the drug companies are deliberately sabotaging any cure for illnesses such as cancer and HIV/AIDS in order to boost the sales and profits made from existing drugs. If we take HIV as a example we can see why this is rubbish. Yes pharmaceutical companies make huge amounts of money out of the treatment for HIV/AIDS however they would make more out of a vaccine. Any vaccine would only be effective if it was administered globally like the small pox vaccine was. Think of the profits a single pharmaceutical drug company would make if they developed a product that citizen of the planet was guaranteed to buy in some point or another, it could be doubled or tripled if the vaccine has to be given more than once.

Another problem with this theory is that in vaccine have been produced in the past and continue to be made. Why pharmaceutical companies make vaccines for hepatitis B and other diseases when they would make more money if there was no vaccine in existence if they had a sinister motive, answerer they have no sinister motive. Most recently in the UK the HPV vaccine was introduce that prevents women form developing cevarical cancer.

Just now there are a number of vaccine trials in testing for a range of diseases including HIV. These trials cost a fortune on research and development, it is not until a vaccine is in use that the pharmaceutical company makes any real profit out of it. So why if they were sabotaging any attempt at a vaccine would they bother with all that R&D, as it would mean a massive loss for them.

Anyone agree or got anything to add?

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:04 PM
Just one comment about vaccines on hiv vs existing drugs ... of course a vaccine you could give everyone in the world once would be profitable .... and extremely so .... but if you think about even just 200 million people worldwide that have to take 10 pills from the same manufacture every day for the rest of their lives? your looking at the same numbers just slightly spread out.

I absolutely believe that curing illnesses is not profitable ... making someone feel better on the short term though ... now that is profitable. Pain killers are a great example of this... most widely distributed drugs next to anti depressants... go figure =p.

And as to the fact that drug companies are purposefully hurting you? well i dont think its purposeful i just think that they dont have any other option .... example ... Advair an Asthma controller that increases your risk of asthma related death , Or pristique an anti depressant with the side effect of suicidal thoughts or actions?

Just sayin

[edit on 1-7-2010 by conspiracyrus]

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:20 PM
Hey man, what about the recent Avian-Flu pandemic that never materialised?

I'm going out on a limb here and am gonna assume the drug companies sold the vaccines etc. There's a few threads detailing some shady goings-on with that whole thing.

If I wasn't off out, I'd dig you the links. I'm sure someone will.

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:24 PM
reply to post by kevinunknown


I think when you use the word "deliberately" , you should also consider the word "negligence". The two go hand and hand.

That aside... look at this link and make your same claim.

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:25 PM
reply to post by jokei

This for instance;

Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, accused the makers of flu drugs and vaccines of influencing the World Health Organisation’s decision to declare a pandemic.

[edit on 1-7-2010 by Point of No Return]

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:25 PM

Making A Killing: The Untold Story Of Psychotropic Drugging

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:25 PM
The way some pharmco's try to conceal the negative effects of their medication's fits well within the definition of conspiracy.

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:28 PM
The most common side effect for anti depression medication is suicidal thoughts. That's just what a depressed person needs, suicidal thoughts lol oh the irony!

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:31 PM
I'm not buying it for one second. It is reality, it is a conspiracy!
We are being removed from nature, put into a system of greed and hypocrisy.
The History of the
"Business With Disease"

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:35 PM

Big Pharma researcher admits to faking dozens of research studies for Pfizer, Merck

Thursday, February 18th, 2010 It’s being called the largest research fraud in medical history. Dr. Scott Reuben, a former member of Pfizer’s speakers’ bureau, has agreed to plead guilty to faking dozens of research studies that were published in medical journals.
Now being reported across the mainstream media is the fact that Dr. Reuben accepted a $75,000 grant from Pfizer to study Celebrex in 2005. His research, which was published in a medical journal, has since been quoted by hundreds of other doctors and researchers as “proof” that Celebrex helped reduce pain during post-surgical recovery. There’s only one problem with all this: No patients were ever enrolled in the study!
Dr. Scott Reuben, it turns out, faked the entire study and got it published anyway.
It wasn’t the first study faked by Dr. Reuben: He also faked study data on Bextra and Vioxx drugs, reports the Wall Street Journal.
As a result of Dr. Reuben’s faked studies, the peer-reviewed medical journal Anesthesia & Analgesia was forced to retract 10 “scientific” papers authored by Reuben. The Day of London reports that 21 articles written by Dr. Reuben that appear in medical journals have apparently been fabricated, too, and must be retracted.
After being caught fabricating research for Big Pharma, Dr. Reuben has reportedly signed a plea agreement that will require him to return $420,000 that he received from drug companies. He also faces up to a 10-year prison sentence and a $250,000 fine.

He was also fired from his job at the Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Mass. after an internal audit there found that Dr. Reuben had been faking research data for 13 years. (

What’s notable about this story is not the fact that a medical researcher faked clinical trials for the pharmaceutical industry. It’s not the fact that so-called “scientific” medical journals published his fabricated studies. It’s not even the fact that the drug companies paid this quack close to half a million dollars while he kept on pumping out fabricated research.
The real story here is that this is business as usual in the pharmaceutical industry.
Dr. Reuben’s actions really aren’t that extraordinary. Drug companies bribe researchers and doctors as a routine matter. Medical journals routinely publish false, fraudulent studies. FDA panel members regularly rely on falsified research in making their drug approval decisions, and the mainstream media regularly quotes falsified research in reporting the news.
Fraudulent research, in other words, is widespread in modern medicine. The pharmaceutical industry couldn’t operate without it, actually. It is falsified research that gives the industry its best marketing claims and strongest FDA approvals. Quacks like Dr Scott Reuben are an important part of the pharmaceutical profit machine because without falsified research, bribery and corruption, the industry would have very little research at all.
Pay special attention to the fact that the Anesthesia & Analgesia medical journal gladly published Dr. Reuben’s faked studies even though this journal claims to be a “scientific” medical journal based on peer review. Funny, isn’t it, how such a scientific medical journal gladly publishes fraudulent research with data that was simply invented by the study author. Perhaps these medical journals should be moved out of the non-fiction section of university libraries and placed under science fiction.
Remember, too, that all the proponents of pharmaceuticals, vaccines and mammograms ignorantly claim that their conventional medicine is all based on “good science.” It’s all scientific and trustworthy, they claim, while accusing alternative medicine of being “woo woo” wishful thinking and non-scientific hype. Perhaps they should have a quick look in the mirror and realize it is their own system of quack medicine that’s based largely on fraudulent research, bribery and corruption.
You just have to laugh, actually, when you hear pushers of vaccines and pharmaceuticals claim their medicine is “scientific” while natural medicine is “unproven.” Sure it’s scientific — about as scientific as the storyline in a Scooby Doo cartoon, or as credible as the medical license of a six-year-old kid who just received a “let’s play doctor” gift set for Christmas. Many pharmaceutical researchers would have better careers as writers of fiction novels rather than scientific papers.
For all those people who ignorantly claim that modern pharmaceutical science is based on “scientific evidence,” just give them these three words: Doctor Scott Reuben.
Drug companies support fraudulent research

Don’t forget that the drug companies openly supported Dr. Scott Reuben’s research. They paid him, in fact, to keep on fabricating studies.
The drug companies claim to be innocent in all this, but behind the scenes they had to have known what was going on. Dr. Reuben’s research was just too consistently favorable to drug company interests to be scientifically legitimate. If a drug company wanted to “prove” that their drug was good for some new application, all they had to do was ask Dr. Reuben to come up with the research (wink wink). “Here’s another fifty thousand dollars to study whether our drug is good for post-surgical pain (wink).”
And before long, Dr. Reuben would magically materialize a brand new study that just happened to “prove” exactly what the sponsoring drug company wanted to prove. Advocates of western medicine claim they don’t believe in magic, but when it comes to clinical trials, they actually do: All the results they wish to see just magically appear as long as the right researcher gets paid to materialize the results out of thin air, much like waving a magician’s wand and chanting, “Abra cadabra… let there be RESEARCH DATA!”
Shazam! The research data materializes just like that. It all gets written up into a “scientific” paper that also magically gets published in medical journals that fail to ask a single question that might exposed the research fraud.
I guess these people believe in magic after all, huh? Where science is lacking, a little “research magic” conveniently fills the void.
The whole system makes a mockery of real science. It is a system operated by criminals who fabricate whatever “scientific evidence” they need in order to get published in medical journals and win FDA approval for drugs that they fully realize are killing people.
What is “Evidence-Based Medicine?”

The fact that a researcher like Dr. Reuben could so successfully fabricate fraudulent study data, then get it published in peer-reviewed science journals, and get away with it for 13 years sheds all kinds of new light on what’s really behind “evidence-based medicine.”
The recipe for evidence-based medicine is quite simple: Fabricate the evidence! Get it published in any mainstream medical journal. Then you can quote the fabricated evidence as “fact!”
When pushers of pharmaceuticals and vaccines resort to quoting “evidence-based medicine” as their defense, keep in mind that much of their so-called evidence has been entirely fabricated. When they claim their branch of toxic chemical medicine is based on “real science,” what they really mean is that it’s based on fraudulent science but they’ve all secretly agreed to call it “real science.” When they claim to have “scientific facts” supporting their position, what they really mean is that those “facts” were fabricated by criminal researchers being paid bribes by the drug companies.
“Evidence-based medicine,” it turns out, hardly exists anymore. And even if it does, how do you know which studies are real vs. which ones were fabricated? If a trusted, well-paid researcher can get his falsified papers published for 13 years in top-notch science journals — without getting caught by his peers — then what does that say about the credibility of the entire peer-review science paper publishing process?
Here’s what is says: “Scientific medicine” is a total fraud.
And this fraud isn’t limited to Dr Scott Reuben, either. Remember: he engaged in routine research fraud for 13 years before being caught. There are probably thousands of other scientists engaged in similar research fraud right now who haven’t yet been caught in the act. Their fraudulent research papers have no doubt already been published in “scientific” medical journals. They’ve been quoted in the popular press. They’ve been relied on by FDA decision makers to approve drugs as “safe and effective” for widespread use.
And yet underneath all this, there’s nothing more than fraud and quackery. Sure, there may be some legitimate studies mixed in with all the fraud, but how can we tell the difference?
How are we to trust this system that claims to have a monopoly on scientific truth but in reality is a front for outright scientific fraud?
Keep up the great work, Dr Reuben

Thank you, Dr Scott Reuben, for showing us the truth about the pharmaceutical industry, the research quackery, the laughable “scientific” journals and the bribery and corruption that characterizes the pharmaceutical industry today. You have done more to shed light on the true nature of the drug industry than a thousand articles on ever could.
Keep up the good work. After paying your fine and serving a little jail time, I’m sure your services will be in high demand at all the top drug companies that need yet more “scientific” studies to be fabricated and submitted to the medical journals.
You may be a dishonest, disgusting human being to most of the world, but you’re a huge asset to the pharmaceutical industry and they need you back! There are more studies that need to be fabricated soon; more false papers that need to be published and more dangerous drugs that need to receive FDA approval. Hurry!
Because if there’s one place that extreme dishonesty is richly rewarded, it’s in the pharmaceutical industry, where poisons are approved as medicines and fiction is published as the truth.
Sources for this story include: ater-81727667.html fizer-merck-drugs/

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 01:37 PM
And you'd have to be completely brain dead to look at a fraction of these studies and say there isn't some kind of conspiracy to keep healthy cures from the public's eyes.

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 02:15 PM
I know hemp oil(THC oil, like the stuff used in the Run From The Cure documentary, not the seed oil at the store) can be used to treat many types of cancer.

Its a fact THC kills cancer cells, its all probably the reason weed smokers dont have higher rates of cancer even though there are carcinogens in the smoke.

take a look for yourself

There might not be an organized conspiracy, but it is true that Rick Simpson ( of ) has been ignored by the medical industry, even though his treatments are based on the science we already have confirmed(ie THC kills cancer cells). Also, grants are simpily not given out for research in this field. The reason for this probably has to do more with the social stigmas of marijuana than it does with making money, but either way it's a travesty.

It's no conspiracy big pharma ignores natural remedies like this, for whatever there reasons are.

ADD drugs, which are most commonly amphetamines with potential for abuse, are peddled to children like crazy and I'd argue its usually unnecessary.

Anti-depressants and anti-psychotics are often arbitrarily given out for any old problem by doctors who profit off the sales, I know this is a fact from experience. I was given medication which I did not need by a doctor who wouldn't even talk to me, he just looked at my file and saw I smoked weed so I must be bi-polar(yes, he thinks if you have smoked weed or want to, you need medication to make you "better" lol), although Im far from bi-polar. Also I was not informed that there were very serious side effect risks. I looked it up on my own and saw the drug was very dangerous even compared to other pharma drugs, I was very angry he said nothing.(I was 17 at the time so didnt get a say in the prescription process). The other patients visiting the doctor received little face time as well, youd just go in, he literally ask you 2 or three questions(he would barley be paying attention and just nod his head), and then he'd say "you needed your meds upped, heres your prescription..". Youd be in and out of his office in 1 to 2 minutes flat. He'd schedule as many appointments as he could too, there would sometimes be two other people with the same exact appointment time as myself waiting in the lobby. I have had other doctors that are better, but not by much, I dont even want to know how bad the cheap doctors are if these were the "good" ones..

Its no conspiracy big pharmacy profits massively off medications that are unnecessarily prescribed.

St. Johns Wart is more effective than most pharma drugs for depression, but go to a doctor and tell them you have depression and they wont even ask you if youve tried it, they'll just put you on some liver-destructing crap that may just make things worse. Same goes for most herbal drugs that can replace pharma drugs and are safer, plus at a lower price.

Also, have you seen how many medications get recalled? You think big pharma did all they could to ensure safety before releasing those meds?

Dont underestimate your neighbors greed, big pharma is a business like another and will put profits first.

[edit on 1-7-2010 by CREAM]

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 02:37 PM
I disagree. Profusely.

Drugs are being made to simulate neurotransmitter release or inhibition...when there are real world activities/exercises that could provide experiential association by which healthy behaviour, in context, would more likely occur in my opinion.

Social, productive behavioural change in lifestyle could progress an individual as the neurological association would be on the experience.

Where is the experiential...and social...association with taking a pill?

It's centered on the pill/prescription and the physiological influence thereof.

Why are alcoholics considered addicts? Because it makes them social.

The key is sociality and messing with brain chemistry for physiological alleviation bypasses sociality.

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 02:42 PM
I'm sorry, but I'm calling BS on your whole premise. Big Pharma is one of the top money-makers in the world. Their ONLY purpose is to make a profit.

Bayer and many others have knowingly shipped tainted meds to impoverished nations, knowing that they could still make a profit instead of having to dispose of them like they were ordered.

Have you studied the anti-depressant marker? These drugs are geared towards making the user a user FOR LIFE.

There are so many indications that while they may not be deliberately killing people, they certainly ARE only in it for the profit, that it made my jaw drop to see someone claim they were only in it for the good.

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 02:50 PM
Your research needs more research...

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 03:06 PM
Just go to your local pharmacy and ask for the literature on the side effects of any drug you are taking. Watch the freaking commercials on TV pushing the latest drug and then listen to the side affects for god sake they are telling you just exactly how they are poisoning you.

Doctors don't improve health they treat symptoms. There are some decent doctors out there but it is in there interest to have thier waiting rooms full, not to heal people.

Why is the FDA trying to outlaw natural remedies and supplements if there is no conspiracy? Why are Chiropractors still called quacks by the medical establishment when they are the major treatment for back injuries now? Because they don't use drugs! Why are medicines regulated and only approved substances allowed through the drug companies or you will be imprisoned and even killed for trying to medicate yourself?

OPer should really get out more. Yeah there is no conspiracy the drug companies are looking out for you and just want the best for you and could care less about thier bottom line... Sigh

[edit on 1-7-2010 by hawkiye]

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 03:12 PM
reply to post by kevinunknown

Of course there are conspiracies associated with drug companies, in fact, I'd say it was one of the biggest we face.

I have been looking into this lately:

On Being Sane In Insane Places
Prescription Drug Stats A Bitter Pill To Swallow

If you think that 6 year olds being diagnosed with depression and being treated with heavy duty prescription drugs is normal then we have very different definitions of normal.

Here's the most, um, depressing part: When you tally up all the prescriptions doctors wrote, the figure actually outnumbers the U.S. population. So yeah, we're over-medicated. Something else to feel anxious about.

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 03:41 PM
kevinunknown you are kidding, right ?

We all want a quick easy fix to our ailments. Todays drugs do just that, they relieve the symptom not cure the cause.
Doctors want help their patients to relieve the symptoms so they give the patient a drug to RELIEVE THE SYSMPTOMS.
So, if there was a drug to cure you there would be no need to make all the other drugs to relieve your symptoms, and therefore there would be no money in making all those other drugs.

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 03:54 PM
This is from TODAY my friend:

BBC - Swine flu vaccine contracts 'lacked get out clauses'

The contracts negotiated by the UK government for a swine flu vaccine should have had get-out clauses to protect taxpayers' money, experts say.

An independent review, led by Dame Deirdre Hine, a former chief medical officer for Wales, said that was just one of the lessons that should be learned.

Some of the communications about the pandemic were confusing, it added.

My opinions about Big Phama can be found in my thread:

Big-Phama : The most immoral of them all.

I don't want to get into a bad mood, so I'll leave it at that!

All the best kiwi

[edit on 1-7-2010 by kiwifoot]

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 04:46 PM

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
kevinunknown you are kidding, right ?

We all want a quick easy fix to our ailments. Todays drugs do just that, they relieve the symptom not cure the cause.
Doctors want help their patients to relieve the symptoms so they give the patient a drug to RELIEVE THE SYSMPTOMS.
So, if there was a drug to cure you there would be no need to make all the other drugs to relieve your symptoms, and therefore there would be no money in making all those other drugs.

We need to have a global view of the set (the whole of) of medecines a drug company has to "offer".
Strategically they have to consider the hundreds of PRODUCTS (because you may be thinking they sell you remedies, but no, they're commercial products) they sell.

If they begin to deliver real cures, whats gonna happen to a large quantity of their pain killers and anti depressants?
Because discomfort/pain is a component of a lot of diseases... And what happens when you're (seriously) ill?
Well... You're depressed.
Catch my drift?

If we take the problem from even "higher", we realize that a control (now we talk about reduction) of the population has always been wished by our elite (beside for the post-war recovery periods).
And who are the main share holders of these companies?

Anyway people who rely on "big pharma" to cure/save them are fools.

A good hygiene, a balanced nutrition (I know it becomes harder and harder nowadays), the least of self-inflicting damaging substances (alcohol, nicotine and numerous toxins we found in processed industrialized food, but also cures themselves!) possible... And that does it.

To KNOW that we are masters of our bodies and not the opposite should also help to stay in good health... And live longer.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in