The Evidence Gap
Setting a Price on LifeArticles in this series will explore medical treatments used despite scant proof they work and will consider steps toward medicine based on evidence.
All Articles in the Series »My name is John Board. I'm an Assistant Director on movies and have been for more than a few years. This site will give you a look at my life and a chance to hear my views on health and how I see the world.
I found this article in - http://www.hpathy.com/ which is a great source of all information. I am so pleased to recommend it to everyone. Books free to download, massive amounts of information for all people from novice to professional and articles like the one below. Have a read and know this article supports the blog earlier today about the big Pharma advertising which disseminates false information and information that hints at things without proof. We are being bilked by the most sophisticated and devious Snake Oil salesmen in history.
Homeopathy 4 Everyone - Editorial | |
| |
November, 2008 | |
A Personal Decision- Alan V. Schmukler | |
The question of whether to vaccinate is a personal and often difficult decision. One has to weigh the danger of the disease and the chance of contracting it, against the dangers of the vaccine. Neither side in the debate can guarantee 100% protection. On the one hand, a vaccine might protect you from a disease you were going to get and maybe die of. Benjamin Franklin opposed variolation (smallpox vaccination) and his unvaccinated son died of smallpox. He subsequently changed his mind and expressed regret for his former position. On the other hand, vaccines have been associated with everything from autism, retardation and immune suppression to death. In the U.S., the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (U.S.) has paid out over a billion dollars to parents of children injured by vaccines. Vaccine manufacturers, while insisting on the safety of their product, have steadfastly demanded immunity from lawsuit. So how does one make this decision? The answer is, by becoming knowledgeable about all aspects of this debate, including alternatives to vaccination. Homeopathy has for many years been used to prevent illness (homeoprophylaxis). Hahnemann used Belladonna successfully to prevent scarlet fever. During a smallpox outbreak in Iowa, 1902, the homeopathic remedy Variolinum proved 97% effective in preventing the disease. Thousands of people in Buenos Aires received the remedy Lathyrus sativa during a 1957 polio outbreak. Not a single case of polio developed in those so treated. In 1974, 18,640 children in Brazil were given Meningococcinum to prevent meningococcal meningitis. The protection rate was 97 %. Homeopath and researcher Isaac Golden has developed protocols for preventing illness with homeopathy (see interview in this edition and links to previous articles). While there is some debate about the mechanism of homeoprophylaxis, it clearly works. Homeopaths also use constitutional treatment as an effective alternative to vaccination. Aside from prevention, childhood diseases like measles can be treated easily and safely with homeopathy, which also helps prevent the sequelae. Having said all this, there are still many people who don’t know about homeopathy or have any practical access to homeopathic treatment. The first vaccine was developed by Edward Jenner (1796) who used cowpox to prevent smallpox. Pasteur developed a post- bite inoculation for rabies in 1885. While these first vaccines were rather simple, today’s vaccines contain many excipients that are highly toxic and can cause more harm than the diseases they are intended to prevent. These ingredients include Mercury, Aluminum, Formaldehyde, Phenol, MSG, Monkey kidney tissue, Chick embryonic fibroblasts etc. (see this month’s cartoon) The production of vaccines is a multibillion dollar business, where the bottom line of profits often conflicts with the desire to do good. Consider the issue of Thimerosal, the mercury added to preserve shelf life. In the U.S., government hearings determined that it was harmful and forbid it to be added to any future vaccines (after years of doing damage ). However they permitted vaccine manufacturers to continue selling their stockpiled Thimerosal laden vaccines, a supply which some estimate will last over a decade. In the end, you must make your own informed decision. We hope this month’s commentary and resources will help you do that. |
A drug company is a commercial business whose focus is to research, develop, market and/or distribute drugs, most commonly in the context of healthcare; from wikipedia. But according to a study by two York University researchers estimates the U.S. pharmaceutical industry spends almost twice as much on promotion as it does on research and development, contrary to the industry’s claim.
But how could this be you might ask yourself. Well the answer is fairly easy; regardless of its purpose of helping people it is a bussiness and thus it has to make money and the way of making money is by advertising more and researching less. The researchers’ estimate is based on the systematic collection of data directly from the industry and doctors during 2004, which shows the U.S. pharmaceutical industry spent 24.4% of the sales dollar on promotion, versus 13.4% for research and development, as a percentage of US domestic sales of US$235.4 billion.
In case you are wondering who made this study well the research is co-authored by PhD candidate Marc-AndrĂ© Gagnon, who led the study and Joel Lexchin, a long-time researcher of pharmaceutical promotion, Toronto physician, and Associate Chair of York’s School of Health Policy & Management in the Faculty of Health.
“In our paper, we make the case for the need for a new estimate of promotional expenditures by the U.S. pharmaceutical industry,” says Gagnon. “We then explain how we used proprietary databases to construct a revised estimate and finally, we compare our results with those from other data sources to argue in favor of changing the priorities of the industry.”
This study is very important as it shows the most accurate image yet of the promotional workings of the pharmaceutical industry, says Lexchin. But even this could be wrong a bit because there are other advertising campaigns which could not be taken into consideration such as ghost-writing and off-label promotion so in fact these companies are probably spending more than twice advertising rather then researching. As well, note the authors, the number of meetings for promotional purposes has dramatically increased in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, jumping from 120,000 in 1998 to 371,000 in 2004, further supporting their findings that the U.S. pharmaceutical industry is marketing-driven.
When enough reputed Doctor come forward as Dr. Miller has and say that Flu shots are not supported by any research and in fact are dangerous then we may wake up as a nation. We will come to understand the Fear Factor played over and over again by the Pharmaceutical industry is creating a market and costing us billions of dollars. The country is reeling over health costs and the health system failing due to its cost and much of the money is going to all those high profile drug companies who say they are doing good when in fact they are only doing good to their own pocketbooks.
Here is a statement I found in Dr. Mercola's fine weekly magazine.http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/12/09/prominent-physician-advises-against-flu-shots.aspx
This is a talk about vitamin D and how it helps in many ways to strengthen us to fight disease including the flu.
Dr. Donald Miller, a cardiac surgeon and Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington, recommends avoiding the flu shot and taking vitamin D instead. According to Dr. Miller, “Seventy percent of doctors do not get a flu shot.”
Health officials say that every winter 36,000 people will die from it. But the National Vital Statistics Reports compiled by the CDC show that only 1,138 deaths a year occur due to influenza alone -- more than 34,000 of the “36,000″ flu deaths are actually pneumonic and cardiovascular deaths.
There is also a lack of evidence that young children benefit from flu shots. In fact, a systematic review of 51 studies involving 260,000 children age 6 to 23 months found no evidence that the flu vaccine is any more effective than a placebo. But there is also a risk of harm from the flu vaccine itself, particularly from the mercury, aluminum, and formaldehyde it contains.
The Drug companies should be forced to repay governments for their inappropriate touting of flu shots as a preventative. The FDA should not allow the Drug Companies to put ads on Television. America is one of the few countries in the world that allow Drug ads on TV.RUISLIP, England — When Bruce Hardy’s kidney cancer spread to his lung, his doctor recommended an expensive new pill from Pfizer. But Mr. Hardy is British, and the British health authorities refused to buy the medicine. His wife has been distraught.
Articles in this series will explore medical treatments used despite scant proof they work and will consider steps toward medicine based on evidence.
All Articles in the Series »“Everybody should be allowed to have as much life as they can,” Joy Hardy said in the couple’s modest home outside London.
If the Hardys lived in the United States or just about any European country other than Britain, Mr. Hardy would most likely get the drug, although he might have to pay part of the cost. A clinical trial showed that the pill, called Sutent, delays cancer progression for six months at an estimated treatment cost of $54,000.
But at that price, Mr. Hardy’s life is not worth prolonging, according to a British government agency, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The institute, known as NICE, has decided that Britain, except in rare cases, can afford only £15,000, or about $22,750, to save six months of a citizen’s life.
British authorities, after a storm of protest, are reconsidering their decision on the cancer drug and others.
For years, Britain was almost alone in using evidence of cost-effectiveness to decide what to pay for. But skyrocketing prices for drugs and medical devices have led a growing number of countries to ask the hardest of questions: How much is life worth? For many, NICE has the answer.
Top health officials in Austria, Brazil, Colombia and Thailand said in interviews that NICE now strongly influences their policies.
“All the middle-income countries — in Eastern Europe, Central and South America, the Middle East and all over Asia — are aware of NICE and are thinking about setting up something similar,” said Dr. Andreas Seiter, a senior health specialist at the World Bank.
Tue, Jan 8, 2008
Health, Studies