[Newsbot]

Title: Drug studies suppressed by researchers: UK experts
Category: Health
Posted By: Strutz
Date: 2012-01-04 23:53:09

[CrazyNewfie]

F..king slimeballs, all about profit and not our safety. As long as these a-holes can make money off us thats all that matters. We need to live in a world where greed is't the top priority!

[PublicAnimalNo9]

I find it ironic that there are laws against dealing drugs, unless yer a big fucking pharmaceutical corporation, then it's sell, sell, sell.

One of the "best" drug ads I've seen lately was a treatment for psoriasis. For those that may not know, psoriasis is a non-lethal skin condition. However, some of the drug side effects can lead to death.
Yep, much better than some itching, flaking and cracking.

[Yogi]

I have been berated, called "uncaring asshole, insensitive, disgusting..." for voicing exactly this viewpoint for many years.
To which I always reply "Give me the name of ONE noted cancer-researcher who has died from cancer". I\m still waiting!

[Regina]

Yogi Yogi:

To which I always reply "Give me the name of ONE noted cancer-researcher who has died from cancer". I\m still waiting!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/healt ... at-78.html

[Regina]

If there is blame, it lies with all the government regulatory agencies including Health Canada. They independently review all data and studies before they are approved for sale. There are also the provinces who like Ontario review them again and decide if they are worthy of sale to the public. Both are also the ones who can pull the product from sale as well.

[Yogi]

Regina Regina:

Yogi Yogi:

To which I always reply "Give me the name of ONE noted cancer-researcher who has died from cancer". I\m still waiting!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/healt ... at-78.html

NOPE!^^

Cancer immunotherapy, also known as biotherapy, describes an array of treatments, most using cells from the cancer patient, to bolster the body’s natural ability to kill cancer and to make the immune system better at detecting cancer cells that avoid immunological surveillance.

Dr. Old and a colleague at Sloan-Kettering, Dr. Edward A. Boyse, made a significant contribution to the field in the early 1960s with their discovery of so-called cell surface markers. These are antibody receptors on all living cells, healthy or malignant, that act as the on and off switches of the body’s immunity defense. The immune system reads the markers and, in the best cases, attacks malignant cells while ignoring healthy ones.

The discovery led to the development of a cell classification system that is widely used in diagnosing cancer and other illnesses because every type of cell was found to have a unique surface marker.

The discovery also provided a new theoretical framework for cancer vaccine research. Since Dr. Old and Dr. Boyse’s discovery, vaccine research has focused on the premise that tumors avoid the body’s immune response by hiding their cell surface markers. Vaccines are being designed to trigger the immune response by injecting patients with markers that carry their cancer’s unique antibody-attracting signature.

“For a long time, this was not a very popular avenue of research,” said Dr. Bert Vogelstein, a professor of oncology and pathology at Johns Hopkins University. “But Lloyd believed that the immense power of the immune response, rather than pills and drugs, was the best way to fight this horrible disease.”



This guy was a proponent of 'natural healing' rather than that of 'main stream research' which is just continually flogging incredibly expensive 'pills, and painful treatments' as the 'only hope' for survival of those stricken.

[Scape]

This is why the independence/arms length of review boards like the CDED is vital.

This is a good write up: BC's New Drug Review 'Jeopardizing Lives'

Review boards look like so much overhead but the thing is that they save money just by being there. Like a seatbelt you don't need it 99% of the time but the 1% that you do, man do you ever!

Here is the current process:

http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/pharmacare/decision.html

[Public_Domain]

[Regina]

Yogi Yogi:

NOPE!^^

Yup.
Last year, shortly before he receiving the prostate cancer diagnosis, Dr. Old’s belief was at least partially vindicated by the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the first cancer treatment vaccine. Using research springing from the discovery of cell surface markers, the Dendreon Corporation developed the vaccine Provenge for certain patients with advanced prostate cancer.

[Regina]

Scape Scape:

This is why the independence/arms length of review boards like the CDED is vital.

This is a good write up: BC's New Drug Review 'Jeopardizing Lives'

Review boards look like so much overhead but the thing is that they save money just by being there. Like a seatbelt you don't need it 99% of the time but the 1% that you do, man do you ever!

Here is the current process:

http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/pharmacare/decision.html

I agree with this type of board as long as they don't delay and add considerable cost to the process of getting drugs to the public, especially the much cheaper generic versions. In all cases though, they are duplicating what Health Canada already does. Provincially they may turn it down because of cost, but I've never heard of a province not covering something approved by HC because of study data. This process delay cost the Ontario taxpayers millions!! when they sat on the available generic version of Lipitor last year. And many others since then.

[andyt]

The only thing surprising about this is that NIH funded studies are suppressed. I thought it was only the private companies that did this. All this supposed expertise your doctor has about what he's prescribing you is mostly just company (and now govt?) spin. Look at statins - at one time they wanted to put them in the water supply, not serious concerns are coming out about them.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

The only thing surprising about this is that NIH funded studies are suppressed. I thought it was only the private companies that did this. All this supposed expertise your doctor has about what he's prescribing you is mostly just company (and now govt?) spin. Look at statins - at one time they wanted to put them in the water supply, not serious concerns are coming out about them.

If there's enough people in one area that are taking statins, it's most likely already in their water supply.

[ShepherdsDog]

I've said it before. If you want a true horror story about drugs being prescribed that are deadly, watch Generation Rx

[Freakinoldguy]

It isn't just the drug companies, it's the doctors prescribing this crap whithout even looking the stuff up on the internet that are just as much to blame.

I've found neat things about some of the crap I'm taking. One drug along with the myriad of liver, colon, brain, bone or skin problems that are on all the warning labels can cause irratibility and agression which the doctor never mentioned. If it was my guess I'd say he doesn't know or doesn't care. Yet, there was a clinical study done on it in 04 which was widely published by an extremely reputable medical journal.

Another drug causes, heart arhythmia, and when researched on google, the American heart and lung association stated that this drug should not be considered a safe alternative for previously prescribed drugs. Once again the good doctor failed to tell me anything about this. Never took the crap thank god.

My guess is that they're either trying to kill all us older people off, they're being paid off by big pharmacuticals, or they're just to fucking stupid or lazy to actually be able to use google before they poison their patients.

It's anyones guess.