Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Homeopathy is 'rubbish', says chief medical officer

page: 9
4
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 03:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by alkali
 


Atherosclerosis is the heart disease due to buildup of plaque and calcium in the arteries....How do you cure that disease? BY REMOVING IT.....It isn't rocket science!


Damage to the blood vessel wall by angioplasty triggers physiological response that can be divided into two stages. The first stage that occurs immediately after tissue trauma, is thrombosis. A blood clot forms at the site of damage and further hinders blood flow. This is accompanied by an inflammatory immune response.



A stent is a mesh, tube-like structure often used in conjunction with angioplasty to permanently hold open an artery, allowing for unrestricted blood flow, or to support a weakness in the artery wall called an aneurysm. The artery can react to the stent, perceive it as a foreign body, and respond by mounting an immune system response which leads to further narrowing near or inside the stent.


These stents do more harm than good...But by all means keep using wikipedia and google to mount your rebuttals...

Atherectomy has nothing to do with what I am talking about, either...

Haven't you ever heard of Vitamin K2? What about Vitamin C? Both have been shown to break down the plaque buildups so that they may be carried out of the body, and Vitamin K2 even takes the calcium out of your soft tissues and arteries and deposits it back into your bones and teeth where it is supposed to be...

This can even be a sign of an underlying parathyroid dysfunction, because when the parathyroid is deprived of Boron, it will start releasing too much PTH, which causes the teeth and bones to release calcium....Which goes where in the deficiency of Vitamin K2? Straight into your soft tissues and arteries..

I would like to also point out that restenosis does indeed happen a good percentage of the time with patients who have received stents; not to mention either that heart disease kills about 350,000+ people a year....They are doing such a fantastic job aren't they?
edit on 29-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)
edit on 29-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)


Actually if you did your research properly instead of just pushing your agenda you would see that the incidence of myocardial infarction and the need for surgical bypass procedures (heart muscle death generally due to an occlusion in one or more of the coronary arteries) have dropped dramatically since stents were first introduced in the 1990's.
Before stents there were 2 options, a balloon angioplasty or a bypass. Balloon angioplasties are good for mild stenoses but the effects generally don't last for a long time and you usually need to have this re-done every so often. Bypass is a major surgical procedure and certainly has it's associated risks.
The original stents (my Dad has one in his left anterior-descending coronary) were essentially just a flexible bare-wire scaffold. Introducing something like that into the body does have an inflammatory effect and initially the incidence of re-stenosis was relatively high. This is easily repaired by inflating a balloon within the stent though.
Some years later, drug-eluting stents came on the scene. These were the same metal scaffold which were coated in an anti-inflammatory steroid. This steroid eluted from the stent into the local tissue, reducing inflammation and therefore reducing re-stenosis. However these aren't suitable for everyone so other types have been developed such as the biodegradable stent.

To give such a glib comment as "stents cause more harm than good" is typical ignorance and agenda pushing.
No, stents aren't the be-all and end-all of "curing" heart-disease, they are a reactionary procedure when someone is in danger of having an MI or has just had one.

I'm thankful that in a time when stents were not very commonplace I had the knowledge and influence to recommend to my Dad's cardiologist to implant one rather than just balloon his artery.
That was in 1995 following an anterior MI and he's never required any further intervention.

Trying to compare stents to vitamin therapy is ludicrous and I love the way people like you always mention the number of people who die from diseases.
Why not, to give your "argument" some balance, mention the number of people's lives which are saved by coronary interventions eh?
You'll find it's a lot more than 350,000.




posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pardon?Trying to compare stents to vitamin therapy is ludicrous


I think your thread speaks for itself. Just to highlight though, vitamin therapy is not a homeopathic remedy. So in a thread about homeopathic remedy, he defends it by citing ... a non homeopathic remedy, and one that is rediculous to suggest.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 04:51 AM
link   
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 


Oh you went to medical school did you? That's hearsay pal, you have no proof to back that up period

You got me.


Depends on what kind of Vitamin, and how it is administered....But of course not; I'm not suggesting it, Linus Pauling is...Linus Pauling > Anything you have to say, because he's actually a real doctor...

You got me again. Anyway, you cannot provide a shred of research that advocates vitamins be used in the place of angioplasty to treat acute MI. Furthermore, Linus Pauling's research on vitamin C was shown to be trash. [1][2]


Mkay so there are stents, and then there are drug-eluting stents...How many of these patients receive the latter? I bet you can't pull up that statistic can you?

You would be wrong. Again. Drug-eluting stents are used in over 70% of cases. [3]


Sources?

Source to my numbers.


I would like to point out that more people die of Heart Disease than violent crime, and prescription pills >.> Something ain't working...Maybe your methods? Those statistics do not say anything in regards to how many patients experience restenosis..

I would like to point out that the number of individuals with heart disease is over 21 times greater than the number of violent crimes committed in the U.S. in 2010.[4] In regard to how many patients experience restenosis, you can find that in most of the studies I've listed.


In cardiac procedures, balloon angioplasty has been associated with a high incidence of restenosis, with rates ranging from 25% to 50%, and the majority of these patients need further angioplasty within 6 months. Treatment with PCI for patients with stable coronary artery disease reduces chest pain, but does not reduce the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or other major cardiovascular events when added to optimal medical therapy.

That is referring to balloon angioplasty without a stent.

I'm fully aware that you're not going to read the majority of these sources, if any. It's much easier pretend that you know what your talking about and blindly buy into trash science like Linus Pauling's vitamin C research if you never bother to look for the truth to begin with. However, in the end, we both know that you will never be able to offer even the smallest bit of evidence to back up your claims and you and Pauling will continue to be wrong.

Additional Sources:

Outcomes with various drug eluting or bare metal stents in patients with diabetes mellitus: mixed treatment comparison analysis of 22,844 patient years of follow-up from randomised trials.

A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization.

Sirolimus-eluting versus uncoated stents in acute myocardial infarction.

Comparison of everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting coronary stents: 1-year outcomes from the Randomized Evaluation of Sirolimus-eluting Versus Everolimus-eluting stent Trial (RESET).

Stent thrombosis and major clinical events at 3 years after zotarolimus-eluting or sirolimus-eluting coronary stent implantation: a randomised, multicentre, open-label, controlled trial.

Lower risk of stent thrombosis and restenosis with unrestricted use of 'new-generation' drug-eluting stents.

Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stents versus Bare-Metal Stents in Large Coronary Arteries in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Use of drug-eluting stents for chronic total occlusions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by alkali
 


Did you seriously say Linus Pauling is trash?

en.wikipedia.org...

I'm not even going to both responding to this garbage.....The man has an institute named after him, while you are playing around on a government conspiracy site arguing about someone's free will choice, when MS Medicine kills millions a year...I think I'm going to go with someone who has a little more credibility than you...

By the way; I read through your link sourcing it used in 70% of cases. It never says that, and I challenge you to point our where...


However, due to unfavorable scientific studies in 2006-2007, the revenues declined drastically.
edit on 30-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
Did you seriously say Linus Pauling is trash?


He never said Linus Pauling was trash.... try reading what he actually said, a bit slower perhaps!



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
Did you seriously say Linus Pauling is trash?


He never said Linus Pauling was trash.... try reading what he actually said, a bit slower perhaps!





blindly buy into trash science like Linus Pauling's


Are you sure you can read?



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
Did you seriously say Linus Pauling is trash?


He never said Linus Pauling was trash.... try reading what he actually said, a bit slower perhaps!



blindly buy into trash science like Linus Pauling's


Are you sure you can read?


Again you are having reading comprehension problems - he said Linus Pauling was pushing trash science - which the links given showed that he was.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:35 AM
link   
reply to post by alkali
 


Your Vitamin C link was about Cancer, not CHD....


I'm talking about his work specifically on Atherosclerosis...

Pauling Treatment

Linus Pauling Atherosclerosis.



Vitamin C has been shown to be beneficial in the following conditions:

Cancer Cystic fibrosis Cardiovascular disease and atherosclerosis Arthritis, especially osteoarthritis Recovery from surgery Multiple Myeloma Certain immuno suppressed states, supports immune system function and killing function of certain white blood cells called phagocytes Bone health (osteoporosis, osteopenia, etc.) May help reduce cholesterol and blood pressure Prevention of cataracts and macular degeneration in combination with other vitamins Diabetes Dementias and depression Gum disease (gingivitis) Glaucoma Slowing the progression of Parkinson’s disease Allergy related conditions Reducing the adverse effects of sun exposure Alleviating dry mouth, especially related to medications that cause dry mouth Healing of burns and wounds Scurvy


That's why you also don't just take Vitamin C......Currently have him on Omega Complex(not just three), but 6, and 9. Vitamin A, C, E, Vitamin K2 & D3, Spirulina, Niacin and Boron. Occasionally, some Lugol's Iodine...

NCBI Vitamin C & E - Atherosclerosis


The scale of vitamin C benefits on cardiovascular system led several authors to theorize that vitamin C deficiency is the primary cause of cardiovascular diseases.[60] The theory was unified by twice Nobel prize winner Linus Pauling, and Matthias Rath (Rath's promotion of vitamins instead of effective medicines for treatment of serious diseases has been very strongly criticised by many reputable authorities, as discussed in detail elsewhere). They point out that vitamin C is produced by almost all animals, with few exceptions including mankind and the great apes. This is due to a genetic deficiency that arose with the common ancestor of human and apes. To survive humans and apes must eat sufficient vitamin C. Without vitamin C humans develop scurvy. Vitamin C is an essential element in insuring that the vascular system is strong and flexible. Pauling and Rath suggest that a deficiency causes weakness in the arterial system and the body compensates by trying to stiffen up the artery walls using other common blood elements. This causes the effect known as atherosclerosis. They suggest that clinical manifestations of cardiovascular diseases are merely overshoot of body defense mechanisms that are involved in stabilisation of vascular wall after it is weakened by the vitamin C deficiency and the subsequent collagen degradation. They discuss several metabolic and genetic predispositions (our inability to produce vitamin C at all being the main one) and their pathomechanism.[61] The Unified Theory of Human Cardiovascular Disease suggests that atherosclerosis may be reversed and cured,[61] but there has been no testing or trial of Pauling's vitamin C theory. Trials on Vitamin E have been made, and have generally not found a beneficial effect. It has been suggested that there may be a beneficial effect for some patients at high risk for atherosclerosis. A review of trials suggested that the lack of evidence for a beneficial effect may have been due to various specified shortcomings in the trial methodologies, such as testing vitamin E without concurrent use of vitamin C.[62] Menaquinone (Vitamin K2), but not phylloquinone (Vitamin K1), intake is associated with reduced risk of CHD mortality, all-cause mortality and severe aortic calcification.


Liposomal Vitamin C is superior to oral, and even IV treatments with Vitamin C are superior...Only about 20-30% of the Tablet is even utilized due to being water-soluble and the Intake Tolerance will give you diarrhea.

Dr Lam

NCBI - Vitamin C & CHD

NCBI - Vitamin C #2

NCBI - Vitamin C #3

edit on 30-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Which would stand to reason he is trash, right??? Do you have any common sense at all?

To say someone is pushing out trash science, would essentially be the same as saying someone is pushing homeopathy; for which you would call them a quack....

Dear holy goat testicles...

I don't know why I bother with this site anymore....People are just here to troll...



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
I don't know why I bother with this site anymore....People are just here to troll...


That appears to be the reason you are here....



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by hellobruce

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
I don't know why I bother with this site anymore....People are just here to troll...


That appears to be the reason you are here....




Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
To say someone is pushing out trash science, would essentially be the same as saying someone is pushing homeopathy; for which you would call them a quack....


Why did you not address this?



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:52 AM
link   
reply to post by alkali
 


While the DES may be used in trials used for publishing; that does not mean that they are giving every Jim Shorts that comes in for a PCI...


The most common use for stents is in coronary arteries, into which a bare-metal stent, a drug-eluting stent, or occasionally a covered stent is inserted. Coronary stents are placed during a percutaneous coronary intervention procedure, also known as an angioplasty.


To which you tried to infer that angioplasty had nothing to do with it...


Bare-metal stents (BMS) and drug-eluting stents (DES) result in an equivalent chance of death when used for primary angioplasty of ST elevation myocardial infarction.



Myocardial infarction (MI) or acute myocardial infarction (AMI), commonly known as a heart attack, results from the interruption of blood supply to a part of the heart, causing heart cells to die. This is most commonly due to occlusion (blockage) of a coronary artery following the rupture of a vulnerable atherosclerotic plaque, which is an unstable collection of lipids (cholesterol and fatty acids) and white blood cells (especially macrophages) in the wall of an artery. The resulting ischemia (restriction in blood supply) and ensuing oxygen shortage, if left untreated for a sufficient period of time, can cause damage or death (infarction) of heart muscle tissue (myocardium).


And Stents push all of that toxic waste up against the artery wall so that it can keep inflaming the heart..

Drug-Eluting Stents


. Indeed, a number of drug-eluting stents have already been proven ineffective in reducing restenosis, with even worse results being reported, as compared with conventional bare stent.



WebMD - CHD & Atherosclerosis

Linus Pauling Institute - Vitamin C

I'm not saying they were irresponsible for putting the stent in...I'm saying they are irresponsible for putting a stent in and doing nothing more about it....We pay them thousands of dollars, as I said, to cover up or put a band-aid on the problem.... They are not doing anything to address the direct cause of the situation...
edit on 30-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 06:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by alkali
 


Did you seriously say Linus Pauling is trash?

en.wikipedia.org...

I'm not even going to both responding to this garbage.....The man has an institute named after him, while you are playing around on a government conspiracy site arguing about someone's free will choice, when MS Medicine kills millions a year...I think I'm going to go with someone who has a little more credibility than you...

By the way; I read through your link sourcing it used in 70% of cases. It never says that, and I challenge you to point our where...


However, due to unfavorable scientific studies in 2006-2007, the revenues declined drastically.
edit on 30-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



Whilst Linus Pauling did indeed receive two noble prizes (something which is mentioned every single time his name is mentioned...) neither of these were for his work with vitamin C. Or in any field of medicine for that matter.
A great chemist does not necessarily make a great BIO-chemist, pharmacologist, physician etc etc.

This certainly showed in his lack of understanding of how to conduct a proper clinical trial.
His methodology was haphazard to say the least and his results, as of yet, have STILL not been reproduced.
The basis of a good clinical study is reproducibility. His didn't have that.

Now onto the Linus Pauling Institute of Medicine (bearing in mind he wasn't medically trained....).
Were you aware that this institute was funded solely by Hoffman-Roche, the huge pharma company?
A company which in 1973 was the world's biggest manufacturer of vitamin C.
So no conflict of interests there then.
In fact, since Pauling was only human I would suggest that he was using his reputation to try and make some money for his retirement. Certainly wouldn't be the first time someone's gone to the dark-side.

So to use Pauling to highlight vit C therapy is not the greatest of ideas.

Getting back to vitamin C though. There have been some studies that have been promising regarding heart disease but certainly nothing to get too excited by at the moment.
If I was suffering from severe chest pain and an NSTEMI was suspected I think I would opt for the invasive therapy rather than some liposomal vit C.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Pardon?
 


Did you just say biased??

And the people who fund these clinical trials for all of their fancy expensive products are NOT biased?

Good grief....Enjoy your thread peeps...



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by Pardon?
 


Did you just say biased??

And the people who fund these clinical trials for all of their fancy expensive products are NOT biased?

Good grief....Enjoy your thread peeps...



No I didn't say biased but if that's what you read into it then fine.

I'll take your lack of a rebuttal as acceptance then shall I?



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 

i do understand.
homeopathic medicine is NOT dangerous

nor is it comparable to a placebo, regardless what this paid mouthpiece says.

it is all of the above because no 'study' was actually performed.
opinion is hardly a study and where's the source 'evidence' ??

in case you didn't read the OP, there is no 'study' included or a link to one.
it is an OPINION piece, nothing more.

rubber and glue, which are you ?


SO conventional medicine is suspect because products are sold but homeopathic medicine is good even though they sell prducts?

The problem with the homeopathic scam is that diluting a tincture of something to one part per million is essentially making water and in many of the dilutions have none of the original substance in at all. When you give someone water and call it medicine, you can get a placebo effect. When you charge someone for water and call it medicine, we call that fraud.. Physiologically, the claims that a dilution of a plant that causes a symptom complained about then applied in what is, at best, a single molecule can somehow curre the symptom (regradless the underlying disease), does not make physiologic sense either.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Unity_99
 


You quote one study, one illness, with a population of 80 people, and then try to draw conclusions on every drug there is. I hope you see the problem with that, if not, I don't think I can help you.


These studies apparently have been going on for years, , and they ranged from 30-60% above normal placebo affect. Harvard doesnt do silly studies. Big Pharma is the pile of rubbish here, things that nature have already provided, some things you can't mention on ATS even, but without the side effects. Apparently for decades.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Gov one saying the placeba affect is a real problem for studying meds, especially psychiatric ones.

www.medicalbillingandcoding.org...


For decades, studies on the placebo effect have shown that patients who believed they were getting a treatment responded in ways that were similar or the same to those who were actually getting a treatment, showcasing an unexpected level of power of the brain over the body.....

Belief is often more powerful than reality.

Life is all about perception.

Sometimes you get in your own way.

There truly is power in positive thinking.

Anything is possible, if you put your mind to it.

We often become reliant on outside factors to empower ourselves....


One of the things that remains consistent is it works even if the patient is told its a placeba!

I big BIg Pharma has literally been stewing for years.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Pardon?
 





So no conflict of interests there then.


Read between the lines, and quit trying to play word games with me...They aren't working....

A) Your statement was sarcasm.

B) It was inferring the studies and funding for Linus Pauling was biased.




I'll take your lack of a rebuttal as acceptance then shall I?


I don't feel compelled to rebut you; your whole post was just silly, ergo not meriting it worth my time to address..


Linus Pauling claimed that specific non-toxic substances called Lp(a) binding inhibitors taken orally will prevent and may even dissolve existing atherosclerotic plaque build-ups.

This work is based on at least 2 Nobel Prizes in Medicine and the efforts of countless medical researchers. The theory and conclusions offered represent the final contribution of an American scientific giant.

The fact that you have not heard about this discovery in the mainstream media is disturbing. It speaks volumes about how powerful interests can somehow suppress vital information that would be detrimental to their financial interests.

In 1989, the eminent American scientist Linus Pauling and his associate Matthias Rath MD, unlocked a medical mystery.

They found the reason human beings suffer heart disease.

Then in 1991, Linus Pauling invented a non-prescription cure. The twice Nobel prize winning genius, chemist, and medical researcher made the strong (and so far unreported) claim that heart disease can be controlled, even cured, by a specific "mega-nutrient" therapy.

Heart patients using the Pauling Therapy routinely avoid angioplasty and open heart surgery. Not by lowering cholesterol, as the media would have us believe, but by attacking the root cause. Rapid recovery has been the rule, not the exception. Strangely, there are no known adverse side effects, yet the medical profession ignores Pauling and Rath.


I suggest reading this as well....

Linus Pauling Career

and


Biochemistry, sometimes called biological chemistry, is the study of chemical processes in living organisms, including, but not limited to, living matter. The laws of biochemistry govern all living organisms and living processes. By controlling information flow through biochemical signaling and the flow of chemical energy through metabolism, biochemical processes give rise to the complexity of life. Much of biochemistry deals with the structures, functions and interactions of cellular components such as proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, nucleic acids and other biomolecules —although increasingly processes rather than individual molecules are the main focus. Among the vast number of different biomolecules, many are complex and large molecules (called biopolymers), which are composed of similar repeating subunits (called monomers). Each class of polymeric biomolecule has a different set of subunit types.[1]

For example, a protein is a polymer whose subunits are selected from a set of 20 or more amino acids. Biochemistry studies the chemical properties of important biological molecules, like proteins, and in particular the chemistry of enzyme-catalyzed reactions. The biochemistry of cell metabolism and the endocrine system has been extensively described. Other areas of biochemistry include the genetic code (DNA, RNA), protein synthesis, cell membrane transport and signal transduction. Over the last 40 years biochemistry has become so successful at explaining living processes that now almost all areas of the life sciences from botany to medicine are engaged in biochemical research. Today the main focus of pure biochemistry is in understanding how biological molecules give rise to the processes that occur within living cells, which in turn relates greatly to the study and understanding of whole organisms.



Linus Carl Pauling (February 28, 1901 – August 19, 1994)[1] was an American chemist, biochemist, peace activist, author, and educator. He was one of the most influential chemists in history and ranks among the most important scientists of the 20th century.[2][3][4] Pauling was one of the founders of the fields of quantum chemistry and molecular biology.


Important to note the BIOCHEMISTRY part, not just the Chemistry....However, if you think Chemistry isn't important in Medicine, than perhaps you should read this as well..


Chemistry is a huge part of medicine, both as a diagnostic and treatment tool. Chemistry departments in hospital medical labs analyze blood, urine, etc. for proteins, sugars (glucose in the urine is a sign of diabetes), and other metabolic and inorganic substances. Electrolyte tests are a routine blood analysis, testing things like potassium and sodium. Most medications are involved with inhibiting a specific enzyme or the expression of a gene. Blocking an enzyme's active site requires a specifically designed "blocker" to disable the enzyme's function. Since enzymes are proteins, their functions differ based on shape and inhibitor drugs must be customized for each target enzyme. This requires chemistry! While the concept of RNA interference (RNAi) is more on the biological side, the engineering of chemicals to inhibit the translation of mRNA into an amino acid sequence by ribosomes requires chemistry. In RNAi, a designed piece of double-stranded RNA literally chops up mRNA to prevent it from undergoing translation.


Linus Pauling - Atherosclerosis & Vitamin C, Lysine, Proline
edit on 30-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Nine FDA scientists appealed to then president-elect Barack Obama over pressures from management, experienced during the George W. Bush presidency, to manipulate data, including in relation to the review process for medical devices. Characterized as "corrupted and distorted by current FDA managers, thereby placing the American people at risk," these concerns were also highlighted in the 2006 report[63] on the agency as well.


In regards to the all-powerful FDA; they are corrupt, and only interested in making profit for themselves, not promoting good health..

CBSNews - FDA Corruption Letters Authentic


The letter made headlines when it was sent last year to John Podesta of Obama's transition team. Written by a group of scientists on FDA letter head -- but with their names blacked out for fear of retaliation -- the letter describes a nightmare of bungling and self-dealing among higher-ups at the drug safety agency. It begs Obama to step in and reform the shop: ... many other FDA managers who have failed to protect the American public, who have violated laws, rules, and regulations, who have suppressed or altered scientific or technological findings and conclusions, who have abused their power and authority, and who have engaged in illegal retaliation against those who speak out, have not been held accountable and remain in place.
edit on 30-1-2013 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by VeritasAequitas
 

Pointing out how bad mainstream medicine can be doesn't validate homeopathy.

Proof that other alternative forms of medicine are effective also doesn't validate homeopathy.





new topics




 
4
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join