Posts Tagged: marketing

Fraud, Embezzlement, and Government Betrayal at the CDC

The next time somebody tells you how ‘high and mighty’ ‘science’ is, you can think about this report on some of the shenanigans so-called ‘scientists’ have been perpetrating.
I’m not saying that ALL of them operate like this, but the major take-away from this is that you can’t just go around blindly believing what experts and researchers say just because they say that it’s ‘science,’ or you’re leaving yourself vulnerable to falsehoods under the guise of truth.
It’s time for people to start using their thinking and reasoning faculties more because at this point there are a lot of profiteering and cronyism going on in science and research, as well as other fields of endeavor. But here we focus on health and how profits can have more impact on your health and treatments than truth.
Many times, scientific conclusions are reached based on political and economic factors more so than on the efficacy of the treatment. That’s how we can have poisons and toxins being used as medicines when there are safer, cheaper, more effective options. The more effective, safer, cheaper options are not profitable for Big Pharma, and they are not under Big Pharma control. So they are not marketed or promoted. Marketing and promotions is literally selling things for a profit. If there’s no profit in cheap cures, they will not be made known to the public. That’s simple business practice.
Just because someone is a scientist or physician doesn’t mean that they have the power to override entrenched financial interests that manipulate the regulation, funding and dissemination of research findings and treatment standards, nor that they necessarily want to. And it also doesn’t mean that patients will receive the best treatments. Unfortunately, patients usually receive the most profitable treatments for Big Pharma.
Big Pharma is highly interested in keeping most people taking vaccines because they make big money on them. But most people don’t know that vaccines also insure that people will be sicker over the long term so that it keeps people paying customers to the Medical Industry. This means that vaccines help raise long term profits for the Medical Establishment.
Find out how you can stop your cancer…

 

Statistics don’t lie, but statisticians certainly can. In his book, “Master Manipulator: The Explosive True Story of Fraud, Embezzlement, and Government Betrayal at the CDC,” investigative journalist James Grundvig exposes what really goes on at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
In it, he reveals how the agency has engaged in massive fraud, misinformation and manipulation of vaccine information. What made Grundvig write such a book?
“A couple of reasons,” he says. “One is I have an autistic son who’s 16 years old now. He’s one of the 5,000 cases kicked out of vaccine court [for] thimerosal poisoning.
Number two, I’m first generation Norwegian-American. Poul Thorsen, the main manipulator — but not the only one — is of Danish descent. I was introduced to an alliance [that asked me] to track down Thorsen over in Denmark, a culture and country I know very well.”
Danish Scientist Charged in Vaccine Research Scam
Thorsen is a major player and an essential character in this real-life drama. In 2011, he was charged with 13 counts of wire fraud and nine counts of money laundering. A federal grand jury alleged Thorsen stole over $1 million from autism research funding between February 2004 and June 2008.
He stole the money while serving as the principal investigator for a program studying the relationship between autism and exposure to vaccines. At the time, The Copenhagen Post reported that:1
“… [Thorsen] submitted over a dozen false invoices from the CDC for research expenses to Aarhus University … instructing them to transfer the funds to a CDC account, which was in fact his personal account …
Thorsen’s research on autism is widely known in academic circles, where he was until this week a highly respected figure. A paper of his on the subject, which is known as ‘The Danish Study,’ is quoted extensively to refute the autism vaccine connection.”
As of 2014, Thorsen was permanently expelled from Denmark’s university hospital system. Thorsen has been a fugitive for the past five years. Yet his whereabouts are no secret. As noted by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in a 2015 Forbes article:2
“The fact that he is roaming free and is easy to find, despite the U.S. Federal indictment … suggests a lack of enthusiasm by HHS and CDC to press for his capture and extradition.
The agency undoubtedly fears that a public trial would expose the pervasive corruption throughout CDC’s vaccine division and the fragility of the science supporting CDC’s claims about thimerosal safety.”
The Master Manipulator
Thorsen’s spectacular demise was likely the result of an inside tip to Aarhus University. But was he really the sole person responsible for the creation of these manipulated studies? According to Grundvig’s investigation, the CDC appears to have had a clear hand in the deception.
In 1999, Thorsen — who had earned his Ph.D. in Denmark the year before — was invited to the CDC in Atlanta as a foreign visiting scientist. He arrived at a time when there was a lot of discussion between vaccine makers and the CDC to remove thimerosal from vaccines.
Thorsen ended up being hired full-time to conduct five studies on Danish people, as the Danes had a preexisting database covering the entire population.
In the U.S., no federal health authority was collecting this kind of comprehensive vaccination and health data. “That was the beginning of five corrupt Danish studies that were done: four on thimerosal; one on MMR,” Grundvig says.
The Link Between Thimerosal and Autism
To this day, most doctors will tell you the science is settled and there’s no link between vaccines and autism. In reality, the science is FAR from settled. In 2000, two secret meetings took place. The first one, in May, took place in Puerto Rico. This meeting covered aluminum adjuvants in vaccines. The second meeting took place in Simpsonwood5 three weeks later.
“In those meetings, they talked about how they all realized — the scientists within those meetings, from the CDC, from college institutions, from Big Pharma vaccine makers — all agreed that thimerosal is a problem, and aluminum is a problem. But they can’t change overnight and lose that kind of money …
These two meetings produced results from foreign scientists, like Dr. Thomas Verstraeten out of Belgium. The CDC realized they had a major problem on their hands with the general public. They found thimerosal … is dangerous to the brain, especially of babies, infants and children.”
The CDC desperately needed to prove there’s no link between vaccines and autism, and Thorsen ended up being the guy hired to produce that evidence. Had the CDC not covered up the truth, we’d probably have an entirely different discussion on vaccines today.
As noted by Grundvig, some of Thorsen’s studies kept getting extended because the CDC simply wasn’t comfortable with the results; even with manipulation, they kept showing an association between the number of vaccines and the rise of autism.
“What’s amazing is Thorsen coming from Denmark. Thimerosal was banned in Denmark in 1991 — fully enacted in 1992. Vaccines today in Denmark have no thimerosal whatsoever. So, you have Thorsen agreeing to do whatever the CDC wanted to, which was manipulate the data, to lose data, to produce results that would favor [thimerosal],” Grundvig says.
CDC Whistleblower Confirms Vaccine-Autism Cover-Up
In his book, Grundvig explains how, were the studies done properly using valid scientific criteria, they would have revealed some incredible insights. For starters, they would have shown that autism is in fact correlated with thimerosal exposure.  Brian Hooker is one of the researchers who has gone back to re-evaluate Thorsen’s studies. In 2017, Danish scientists will again redo the studies, to hopefully settle the matter.
Thorsen was hardly the only manipulator of data at the CDC, however. Dr. William Thompson, a research scientist at the CDC’s National Center for Immunizations and Respiratory Diseases (NCIR), is another. He co-authored four studies refuting a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, as well as thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.
According to Thompson, one of the studies found that African-American boys who received the MMR vaccine before the age of 36 months had an increased risk for autism.8 He also maintains that other CDC studies have found a relationship between thimerosal and tics, which are associated with autism.9
Clearly, there’s no way for the truth to get out unless we have skilled investigative journalists like Grundvig bringing us the full story. After that, it’s a matter of sharing the information, because you can be sure this information will not appear in The New York Times or on your local news station. It’s suppressed by design.
Thimerosal Is Still a Major Vaccine Ingredient
In the early 2000s there was a major push to remove thimerosal from vaccines, but it never took the form of law. Instead, vaccine makers were encouraged to reduce or eliminate thimerosal in their vaccines on a voluntary basis. Some did so, but according to Grundvig, even vaccines that claim to be thimerosal-free are not entirely devoid of it.
“If you read the labels, it says “thimerosal-depleted” … They remove [thimerosal] in the process. It’s filtered out, but it’s not filtered out 100 percent. There’s still thimerosal in all of the thimerosal-containing vaccines as there were before, just a lot less. However, in the flu vaccine, it’s full bore thimerosal.
It’s the cheapest and fastest way to make it. I don’t think that vaccine makers are interested in changing the 20th century recipe to making vaccines. It’s cheap and fast. That’s all they care about. They do not care about safety. They don’t care about children’s health. With poor children’s health, they are able to take care of children, on the other end … with drugs and treatments and so forth. They continuously make money off every American citizen out there,” Grundvig says.

More Information
If you have an interest in vaccine safety and/or autism, you won’t want to miss out on Grundvig’s book, “Master Manipulator: The Explosive True Story of Fraud, Embezzlement, and Government Betrayal at the CDC.” It clearly reveals why we cannot blindly trust our federal health agencies.
We must educate ourselves and understand the political and financial dynamics that underlie the recommendations coming from these agencies. Failing to do so can quite literally be dangerous to your health. In this case, Grundvig has done a remarkable job of explaining the situation at the CDC that has allowed the claim that thimerosal-containing vaccines have no role in autism.
This is not to say that there are no other factors involved in autism. Evidence suggests Roundup and other glyphosate-containing pesticides may play a role. Ditto for other toxic exposures and electromagnetic field (EMF) exposures. Having an unbalanced gut microbiome also appears to influence the outcome. There are many variables that, when combined, can result in autism. Still, that does not mean we should give vaccines a free pass.
Projections suggest that within the next 25 years, half of all children will be autistic. There is no way a culture can survive with half of the population being in the autistic spectrum. We’re looking at the collapse of society if the rise in autism isn’t stopped or reversed, and that means addressing ALL known factors.
For more info, go to: articles.mercola.com

Read on »

It’s not just stem cell research that’s overhyped— medical science spin is a widespread problem

Just as how every week we hear about another revolutionary, groundbreaking discovery in cancer research, this article below says that the problem is widespread in all medical research.  It’s gotten so bad that medical committees are actually admonishing scientists for hyping up their mundane research results. Every minor item is inflated into a Nobel Prize-worthy breakthrough. It’s really bad if research overseers and administrators are taking note.
In addition to inflating claims for what researched treatments can do, researchers are also minimizing the coverage on negative results from tests and studies. It’s like everybody wants to be a top researcher even if their results are mundane, or even negative. Everything is being spun into a big deal. And scientists have been known to alter hypotheses to better fit theories and models, after the experiments have been done.
One thing they don’t cover in this article is the Big Pharma focus on the ‘drugs’ that can treat disease. There is no research being done on anything outside of a drug that can be patented. And much of the ‘research’ that is done on natural compounds is just to identify the most active ingredient so they can isolate it, patent it and then turn it into a profitable drug. No consideration that ‘the whole plant may be greater than the sum of its parts’ because they must profit off of it.  This is just a shortcoming of the business of drugs. If it’s bad for profits, it’s going to be suppressed even though it may be good for people. And that’s the big problem with Big Pharma and the ‘profits are the number one priority’ paradigm. The very business model dictates that they can’t look for, find, or allow anyone else to massively publicize any cheap, readily available, effective treatment or cure for any disease that’s profitable to treat endlessly.
8 of the Best Alternative Cancer Web Sites right here…

Would you read a story if this was the headline: “New study raises questions about an experimental treatment that might not work and won’t be ready for a long time.”
That description would apply to most medical studies that make the news but would be unlikely to generate the clicks, taps, likes and shares that propel a story through cyberspace and social media.
What gets clicks? Words like “breakthrough,” “groundbreaking,” “game changer” and “lifesaver.” And that’s how much of medical news is described.
In one week last June, researchers counted 36 different cancer drugs being described using those superlatives.
But when they took a closer look at the actual drugs, half were not yet approved as safe and effective, and some hadn’t even been tried on humans.
PR machine feeds the hype
So, who’s hyping the science? Everybody, it turns out.
Seeds of hype have been found in many of the press releases sent out by universities and research organizations.
And there’s evidence of that hype being routinely amplified by reporters, scientists and scientific journals.
This hyper-optimism has been measured by examining the words scientists use when they write their research papers. Since the 1970s, the use of positive words in scientific abstracts increased by 880 per cent, according to a study last December in the British Medical Journal.
And now, the world’s stem cell scientists have been told to stop the hype.
The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) issued new guidelines last week that urge scientists to dial back their enthusiasm when talking publicly about their research.
The ISSCR represents more than 4,000 scientists in 60 countries, all investigating the promise of stem cells, which have the potential to develop into any tissue in the body.
In their updated guidelines on the research and development of stem cell therapies, they’ve created a special section about communication that advises researchers to stop exaggerating, oversimplifying and overpromising how soon patients will benefit from their research.
Because people are getting hurt.
Last December, the Food and Drug Administration in the U.S. issued a warning letter to a U.S.-based company offering stem cell therapies for a range of diseases, including autism, multiple sclerosis and Parkinson’s disease. And a U.K. newspaper claims its undercover investigation lead to the closure of a controversial clinic in Germany where a child died after having stem cells injected into his brain.
“We recognize that there is essentially an industry already out there that is marketing unproven therapies directly to patients,” said George Daley, a member of the ISSCR and a professor at Harvard Medical School.
“It is part of the concern that has raised the alarm and part of the impetus behind having these guidelines.”
Read The 5th Wave, now a major motion picture! Only $5.99 in hardcover!
Downplaying negative findings
To help the public better understand the uncertainties and risks inherent in stem cell science, the ISSCR is calling on its scientists to do a better job of managing expectations.
The guidelines warn that some study findings are being “spun” by scientists who “change the goalposts” when their findings fall short, downplaying their original research targets when they don’t achieve statistical significance and highlighting secondary outcomes that do meet the statistical threshold.
Another problem? Overly optimistic predictions that stem cell treatments are just around the corner.
One recent study showed that when media report timelines, they usually predict a drug will be ready for patients within five to 10 years, or even sooner.
The reality is much less optimistic, because, in the end, many of those promising treatments fail.

“We may be afraid to break the bad news that many studies do not result in statistically significant or clinically meaningful effects,” the BMJ authors wrote.
That can lead to the “file drawer” effect, where negative results end up being tossed aside and never published, even though it can be just as important to know what doesn’t work.
And there’s evidence that a publication bias has emerged that is distorting the scientific record because only the positive results are ending up in print.
Publish all results — not just the positive
That has prompted a campaign to liberate the lost data, with scientists demanding that all clinical trials be published and all data be made available.
In the new guidelines, the ISSCR advises its researchers to promptly publish “results regardless of whether they are positive, negative or inconclusive.”
And if the results look promising, the guidelines warn, scientists should keep any predictions about future benefits accurate, circumspect and restrained.
“No doubt, the path forward will be fraught with setbacks, and not all of the clinical trials will work,” said ISSCR president Sean Morrison.
But the scientists are not discouraged by the realities of their world.
For more info, go to: www.cbc.ca

Read on »

Alternative Cancer Treatment Chemotherapy Method

This video covers another anecdotal report from a man (Alan McNutt) who was diagnosed with thyroid cancer in 2000.  According to his reports, he started off going to conventional doctors who performed surgery to remove tumors from his thyroid.  But the tumors came back.  The surgeon who performed the lumpectomy basically told him to go see somebody else when he found out that the tumors returned. He abandoned his patient.  This is totally unacceptable.  It indicates to me that this physician is not dedicated to helping his patients. He isn’t ambitious enough to continue to seek to help his patient, not willing to search anywhere and everywhere for a solution to his patient’s health condition.  Very disturbing to consider that people who have (allegedly) dedicated their lives to helping patients are not dedicated enough to find a cure.

Read on »

Big Pharma Research-Marketing Dressed Up as Science

There are various people who describe the extent to which Big Pharma has infested the entire medical research process, as well as the regulatory function.  It has devolved into a big circus where the ringmasters and workers all share in the profits, all at the expense of the audience and the joke is on the unwitting patients who actually think that they are being given the most advanced, benevolent, modern medical care available.  This is obviously not the case.

Before 1980, most drug research was performed by university professors.  After 1991, the drug studies were starting to be performed by Big Pharma companies.  It was either performed by their employed scientists, or was funded by pharmaceutical companies.  There is one glaring problem with this arrangement.  This put the entire research process under the control of Big Pharma companies that stood to gain from releasing their drugs on schedule, and with no obstacles such as pesky toxicity and bad side effects.

Read on »

Big Pharma Marketing Antics

This is a video on Big Pharma and how they are more focused on making money than on treating patients.  We are literally drowning in prescription medications.  The most amazing part of this is that most ‘new’ drugs that are released to the market are either old drugs that are given a new name, or ‘me too’ drugs that are not really any more effective than the drugs that they are replacing.

The bottom line is that patients are being used as profit patsies.  One drug, Nexium®, is being pushed as a new drug, but it is essentially identical to the drug is it allegedly replacing, Prilosec®.  This move by the manufacturer of the drug made it one of the best-selling drugs in history.  The fact that it is not really different from the old drug shows that the marketing was what made this drug so popular. The old Over-the-counter (OTC) Prilosec® is $24, generic Prilosec® is $119, and the new, virtually identical Nexium® is $171.
Gullible patients who trust the Medical Establishment will not question or understand this sleight-of-hand.  The pharmaceutical companies can sell virtually anything they want to trusting consumers.  The many billions of dollars spent on pharmaceutical advertisements are definitely working.  These commercials are very brief and succinct in their content and effect.  In contrast, I went to actually find the full prescribing information for Prilosec® and found that it was 34 pages long!  And it is full of contraindications, side effects and other technical information that would probably be important to the people taking this drug.  I guarantee you that the vast majority of patients never read this material because is is very technical.  In short, this drug is not as benign as the ad would lead you to believe.
The only reason why Big Pharma can get away with this is because patients are not aware of what is really going on here.  Take conscious notice of the constant barrage of pharmaceutical commercials that come on the television the next time you watch.  It is amazing that they can run this many drug advertisements. Remember that the expense for these advertisements are included in the drug’s price.  Many people don’t care about the final price because health insurance takes care of a lot of it, but this cost is reflected in your bottom line, even if not immediately and directly.  It could be argued that these exorbitant pharmaceutical expenses are wrecking the country.  Economic times are not as good as they were before, and big corporations are not known for their concern for average people.  Just be more aware about what goes on ‘behind the scenes’ that are presented to us.  The first thing we have to do to fight this is to be aware that it is going on.

Read on »

Big Pharma Buries Us in Ads

It is not a secret that Big Pharma inundates us with numerous advertisements for their drugs.  Anyone who watches television can attest to the massive amounts of drug commercials that run.  The reason they run these ads is because they work!

The marketing for Big Pharma drugs used to be focused on the health care practitioners (physicians).  But there has been a shift because today, pharmaceutical companies now spend many billions of dollars on marketing drugs to patients directly through television ads and other media.

Read on »

Mammography and the American Cancer Society

Mammography is touted as the best way for women to protect themselves from breast cancer.  Is this really the case?  It appears that, once again, we are being subjected to propaganda, media spin and an agenda of protecting corporate profits at the expense of cancer patients and unsuspecting victims of Big Pharma and related entities.  This video is about 10 minutes.

The American Cancer Society (ACS) vigorously promotes mammography as a woman’s best way to fight breast cancer while scaring up women with fears of contracting the disease.   It is reported that mammograms are not very accurate.  In fact, they have approximately a 70% failure rate!  The Nordic Cochrane Center reports that about 7,000 women per year are improperly diagnosed with breast cancer, which leads to unnecessary treatments.

Read on »

Most Pharmaceutical Drugs are Worse Than Useless

A new study performed by a sociologist named Donald Light has found strong evidence that the pharmaceutical industry is a “market for lemons” where the sellers are much more informed than the end customers.  They profit from selling products (drugs) that are less effective and more harmful than patients are led to believe.  This startling study is going to be presented at the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association.The study is titled Pharmaceuticals: A Two-Tier Market for Producing ‘Lemons’ and Serious Harm.
The fact is that pharmaceutical companies often conceal and/or downplay the serious side effects of their drugs and exaggerate their benefits.
Dr. Light is a professor of comparative health policy at the University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey.  In addition to this, these companies spend anywhere from two to three times more funds on the marketing of these drugs than they do on the research so that they can get physicians to prescribe these drugs, and so that patients will actually request these drugs from their physicians.
It gets even worse when you consider that these same pharmaceutical corporations are actually in charge of the testing of their own new drugs.  This gives them the opportunity to conceal information that may indicate that their drugs are not as safe or efficacious as they claim.  The shocker is that independent reviewers found that approximately 85% of new drugs offer few, if any new benefits.  But the toxic side effects or misuse of prescription drugs have been shown to be a major cause of death in the United States.  This analysis was based on analysis from independent researchers, sources and studies that include the Canadian Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, Prescrire International and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  The basis of the paper is the work that Dr. Light performed for his book, The Risk of Prescription Drugs, which is scheduled for release this fall by the Columbia University Press.
Light identifies a phenomenon he calls the Risk Proliferation Syndrome that he claims is increasing the number of patients who are given new drugs that have relatively low effectiveness and use, but yet have higher risks of causing harmful side effects.  The pharmaceutical corporations then craft studies that are designed basically slant them so that the benefits appear to be high, and the side effects appear to be lower than they really are.  They also are known to recruit leading researchers to try the drug for off-label or unapproved uses in order to expand their markets.  Physicians often become proselytizers for these companies since they profit from the sale of the drugs, but are also supposed to be the fiduciaries of their patients’ health and safety.  Many times, when patients complain of adverse side effects, studies show that physicians are likely to discount or dismiss them, according to Dr. Light.
This information is a huge ‘red flag’ for people, especially cancer patients, as well as all patients who are treated by the Medical Establishment and the medical industry.  There are too many conflicts of interest and ancillary motivations at work for the average patient to be oblivious to these hidden realities of the medical profession.  This is a strong signal to patients to caveat emptor (let the buyer beware).  It is better to be aware, awake and informed than to blindly trust your health care professional.
8 of the Best Alternative Cancer Web Sites right here…

Read on »