Medical Malfeasance: Insights into the Profit of Deceit
*I'm not branding all drugs /vaccines as unsafe and or ineffective, however, I feel there should be more thorough research and safety testing before unintended consequences manifest themselves among patients. The following is just some information which I came across when digging behind certain adverse reactions in our healthcare system. It is not the be all and end all. Do your own research and try to keep a nuanced perspective.
Throughout
the course of history, humans have been characterized by the insatiable
yearning for truth and understanding. As
a result, principles, theories and laws have been constructed; much of which
forms the basic foundation of science.
Despite attempting to clarify the world, science often seems to present
contradictions which lead to more questions whose answers are pursued with more
science, and so it goes. Science cannot
and should not be viewed as having all the answers. Firstly, there are many things (human
behavior, natural phenomena, etc…) for which science has no sound
explanation. Secondly, science, especially
today, is often highly funded and awarded by extremely powerful organizations
and institutions. “Tobacco science”,
heavily funded by tobacco industry money, appeared to “prove” that tobacco was
not only harmless, but had various benefits such as curing sore throats among
other things (1). Similar tactics have
been used to assert the safety of many chemicals and discredit independent
scientific analysis which may present challenge such alleged safety. Polyvinyl Chloride or (PVC), presents one
example of how companies (Dow and Union Carbide) withhold unfavorable
scientific data from the public. This
can be found in the decades of industry documents by Markowitz and Rosner (2).
Tragically, similar monetary
influences are now in full force among modern healthcare practices. From pharmaceutical bribing and lobbying to
the denial of conflicting research, modern medicine has constructed an epidemic
inherent to the medical complex itself.
Such deceit and corruption must be exposed for what it is, using
historical evidence, independent analysis, relevant testimonies and thorough comparisons. I will attempt to present such information
here to the best of my ability.
Lobbying: For 2014, The Center for
Responsive Politics listed the total amount of lobbying for the Pharmaceutical/
Health Products industry in the U.S. at nearly $228 million. This information was provided through the
Senate Office of Public Records. The
largest cash contributor in this group is by far the Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America. Other
prominent donors include Amgen Inc., Eli Lilly & Co, Johnson &Johnson,
Pfizer, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline. Many
of these donors partner with each other as “clients”, receiving various amounts
of lobbying money (3).
The inherent nature of lobbying is
antithetical to democracy. A prime
example can be seen in the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVI) of
1986. This Act, created under the guise
of promoting safe vaccines and awarding families of the vaccine-injured, has
increasingly become a complex maze, controlled by vaccine manufacturers. According to this legislation, vaccine
providers would (4):
* Inform parents of the risks and
benefits to having their children vaccinated.
*Document the name of vaccine
manufacturers and lot number for each vaccine given
*Include any serious adverse-event(s)
after vaccination into the child’s permanent medical record
*Use the Vaccine Adverse Events
Reporting System (VAERS) to report any serious adverse events post vaccination.
These are all essential components in
maintaining vaccine safety and documenting lack thereof to be improved. Unfortunately, however, there are too few
checks in place, ensuring the letter and spirit of this Act is maintained. One testament of this is the “Vaccine
Memorial” on the webpage for the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). This section documents all serious adverse
vaccine-reactions reported to the center.
A look into parent testimony concerning these reactions reveals, among
other things, that healthcare providers rarely give serious consideration to
their claims that a certain vaccine or series of vaccines may have injured
their child. One such report reveals the
Goudelock family of North Carolina.
Their child, Alexis, “only lived 13 hours after the shots”, the
suspected vaccine to be HIB (5).
“She
cried and was so limp”, state Alexis’ parents, “…She drank her milk but wasn’t
alert and trying to play. We thought it
was a normal reaction to the immunizations because that’s what they told
us...Of course, they ruled it SIDS”.
SIDS,
referrers to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome; “defined as the sudden death of an
infant less than 1 year of age that cannot be explained after a thorough
investigation is conducted, including a complete autopsy, examination of the
death scene, and a review of the clinical history” (6). The CDC claims that “accidental suffocation
and strangulation in bed” may be a cause of SIDS.” There is no public mention of SIDS being a
potential result of the HIB vaccine by the Centers for Disease Control.
Such a link is documented in a study by CDC and FDA researchers titled “Adverse
Events following Haemophilus influenzae Type b [HIB] Vaccines in the Vaccine
Adverse Event Reporting System, 1990-2013.”
Out of 749 reported deaths with autopsy/death certificate records, 384
(51%) were reported as SIDS (7). A
search of the PubMed database on vaccine adverse-events reveals numerous
studies on different vaccines, where industry research contradicts even their
own recommendations. If the NCVI Act
intends to promote complete awareness on vaccines, such information should be
clearly presented to all vaccine administrators and parents before having their
child vaccinated.
The Gardasil vaccine
presents further cases of corruption regarding vaccine safety and efficacy,
along with the hiding of critical data.
In an interview with the French magazine, Principes de Santé, former
Merck physician, Bernard Dalbergue, says the vaccine “…is useless and costs a
fortune”. He goes on to state “Cases of
Guillian-Barré syndrome, paralysis of the lower limbs, vaccine-induced MS and
vaccine-induced encephalitis can be found, whatever the vaccine.” As for taking Gardasil off the market,
Dalbergue states “There is far too much financial interest for these medicines
to be withdrawn” (8). Michèle Rivasi,
the MEP of France, held a press release discussing important concerns about
Gardasil. Chief among these were a lack
of scientifically sound clinical trials to evaluate safety. In a gold-standard scientific setting, this
is done by comparing a given treatment (in this case Gardasil) against a
placebo. Unfortunately, “the vaccine
adjuvant (used to cause immune response) itself” was used as the
“placebo”. Gardasil also contains aluminum
as an adjuvant, which scientists Chris Shaw and Lucija Tomljenovic from the
University of British Columbia have shown to be problematic: “The aluminum migrates into the body and
reaches the brain, where it accumulates. There are many adverse effects noted:
death, convulsions, syncope, Guillain-Barré syndrome, transverse myelitis,
facial paralysis, chronic fatigue syndrome, autoimmune diseases, pulmonary
embolisms, myofasciitis macrophages, pancreatitis…” (9) The vaccine adverse events reporting system
(VAERS) documents over 38,000 adverse events (including death,
hospitalizations, disabilities, etc…) up until January 2015 (9). These numbers are likely higher due to those
who don’t use VAERS for whatever the reason.
The pharmaceutical industry and the
researchers surrounding them often appear to be in a maze. On the one hand, they must convince the
public and regulatory agencies that they’re doing sound research; on the other,
they have to deal with potentially unfavorable research results which can
affect their bottom line. When the
now-recalled prescription drug, Vioxx was initially tested for safety (starting
in January, 1999), a total of 8,000 study participants were involved. Half received Vioxx while the other half
received naproxen
(generic Aleve®). Results showed 52
cardiovascular events in the Vioxx group, compared to 29 with the naproxen
group, with these events cited as “being significant beyond the level of chance” (10). The chair of the Data Safety and Monitoring
Board (DSMB), Dr. Michael Weinblatt, disapproved of the pooled analysis plan
proposed by Merck to look into potential safety issues with Vioxx. While deciding which statistical method would
be appropriate, Merck offered Weinblatt a consulting position on their advisory
board for COX-2 inhibitors. For each day
of his consulting work, he was paid $5,000. This should raise questions,
because DSMBs are intended to operate independently of the company that employs
them and are composed of outside consultants who have no vote in company
decisions (11).
Despite these initial safety concerns,
Merck was aggressively marketing to doctors, urging Vioxx prescriptions to be
filled. By the end of 1999, over five
million prescriptions were written for Vioxx, and negative health implications
continued to mount. Only in 2002 did the
FDA have Merck list cardiovascular risks on the drug’s label, with Merck
incessantly trying to get this removed.
By 2003, Vioxx sales hit $2.5 billion worldwide. When Merck conducted a second study
(APPROVe), it found that Vioxx increased heart attack risk for those taking it
less than two years. In September of the
following year, Merck voluntarily withdrew Vioxx from the market, leaving many
to question the company’s safety analyses and their race towards profitable
marketing. Numerous physicians involved
with safety trials testified about Merck hiding and denying crucial evidence
about the true risks of Vioxx. One such
physician and FDA scientist, Dr. David Graham, testified that FDA insiders
tried to cover up his findings, linking Vioxx to heart attacks. A total of 60,000 U.S. claims were filed
against Merck in multidistrict litigation (MDL). Merck won 11 out of 16 MDL cases and, in
2007, set up a $4.85 billion settlement fund, paying out close to 35,000
claims. According to the watchdog, Drug
Watch, “In 2011, Merck
agreed to pay $950 million and pleaded guilty to a federal misdemeanor charge
related to its shady marketing and sales tactics. The company incurred a $321
million criminal fine and was ordered to pay the remainder to the federal
government and state Medicaid agencies” (12).
A “healthcare” system which increasingly
places profit over healing, produces such corruption. We cannot expect doctors to question
pharmaceutical prescriptions when they are bombarded with company perks to
promote a given drug. Researchers cannot
be expected to thoroughly investigate side-effects and include them in their
findings with significant company pressure behind branding a good image of a
given drug/vaccine.
Medical Malfeasance: References
1. HemOnc Today “Cigarettes wereonce ‘physician’
tested, approved”. http://www.healio.com/hematology-oncology/news/print/hemonc-today/%7B241d62a7-fe6e-4c5b-9fed-a33cc6e4bd7c%7D/cigarettes-were-once-physician-tested-approved
3. Center for Responsive Politics. Influence &
Lobbying / Lobbying / Industry: Pharmaceuticals/Health
Products. http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=H04&year=2014
8.
Health Impact News. “Merck’s Former Doctor Predicts that Gardasil
will Become the Greatest Medical Scandal of All Time.”http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/mercks-former-doctor-predicts-that-gardasil-will-become- the-
greatest-medical-scandal-of-all-time/
9.
Sane Vax Inc “Gardasil: An Intentional
Scandal”.http://sanevax.org/gardasil-international-scandal/
10. “Data Safety and Monitoring Board Meeting Minutes, Interim
Non-Endpoint Safety Analysis of Vigor - Unblinded Minutes,” MRK-004200115464 (November
18, 1999), http://www.vioxxdocuments.com/Documents/DSMBs/vigor_dsmb_11_99%20meeting%20minutes.pdf.
11. The Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University. “Vioxx and the Merck Team Effort”. https://web.duke.edu/kenanethics/CaseStudies/Vioxx.pdf
12. Drug Watch. “Vioxx,
What is it? Its Uses and Interactions. http://www.drugwatch.com/vioxx/
Comments
Post a Comment