Ce Forum MONDE-HISTOIRE-CULTURE GENERALE est lieu d'échange, d'apprentissage et d'ouverture sur le monde.IL EXISTE MILLE MANIERES DE MENTIR, MAIS UNE SEULE DE DIRE LA VERITE.
AccueilAccueil  PortailPortail  GalerieGalerie  FAQFAQ  RechercherRechercher  S'enregistrerS'enregistrer  MembresMembres  GroupesGroupes  Connexion  
Derniers sujets
Marque-page social
Marque-page social Digg  Marque-page social Delicious  Marque-page social Reddit  Marque-page social Stumbleupon  Marque-page social Slashdot  Marque-page social Yahoo  Marque-page social Google  Marque-page social Blinklist  Marque-page social Blogmarks  Marque-page social Technorati  

Conservez et partagez l'adresse de MONDE-HISTOIRE-CULTURE GENERALE sur votre site de social bookmarking

Partagez | 


Voir le sujet précédent Voir le sujet suivant Aller en bas 
Rang: Administrateur

Nombre de messages : 8069
Localisation : Washington D.C.
Date d'inscription : 28/05/2005

MessagePEERS Team

is available online at

Dear friends,
Below are
many highly revealing one-paragraph excerpts of important health news
articles from the mainstream media. These articles graphically demonstrate
how all too often the government and drug companies are placing profit
above our health in the decisions they make. These key articles
can help you to avoid major health risks and dangers of which government
is failing to inform us for reasons of profit.
Links are provided
to the full articles on major media websites. If any link should fail to
function, click
here. By choosing to educate ourselves on these important issues and
to spread the word,
we can and will build a
brighter future.

very best wishes of good health for all,

Tod Fletcher and Fred
Burks for PEERS and the Team

The Lowdown on Sweet?
2006-02-12, New York Times

When Dr. Morando Soffritti ... saw the results of his team's
seven-year study on aspartame, he knew he was about to be injected into a
bitter controversy over this sweetener. Aspartame is sold under the brand
names Nutra-Sweet and Equal and is found in such popular products as Diet
Coke, Diet Pepsi, Diet Snapple and Sugar Free Kool-Aid. Hundreds of
millions of people consume it worldwide. Dr. Soffritti ... oversees 180
scientists and researchers in 30 countries. Dr. Soffritti's study
concluded ... that the sweetener was associated with unusually high rates
of lymphomas, leukemias and other cancers. The study ... involved 1,900 laboratory rats and cost $1
million. Soffritti said he was inspired to look at aspartame because of
what he calls "inadequacies" in the cancer studies done by Searle in the
1970's. Others have also challenged Searle's studies. Years before
the F.D.A. approved aspartame, the agency had serious concerns about the
accuracy and credibility of Searle's aspartame studies. From 1977 to 1985
-- during much of the approval process -- Searle was headed by Donald H.
who is now the secretary of defense. Searle was acquired
by Monsanto in 1985. Dr. Soffritti said ... more research and open debate
were needed on whether aspartame was a carcinogen. "It is very important
to have scientists who are independent and not funded by industry looking
at this."

Note: If you want to understand the influence of
big money on your health, this article is well worth reading. Our Health
Information Center Health Information
Center has lots more. And for an incredibly eye-opening documentary on
this that could very well improve the health of you and your friends, click here.

A dangerous dose
2004-09-05, Boston Globe
Marcia Angell
[is] a faculty member at the Harvard Medical School [and one of the] former
editors of The New England Journal of Medicine. Her new book, "The Truth
About the Drug Companies," is a sober, clear-eyed attack on the excesses
of drug company power. How does the drug industry deceive us? It plies
attending physicians with expense-paid junkets to St. Croix and Key West,
Fla., where they are given honoraria and consulting fees to listen to
promotional presentations. It promotes new or little-known diseases
such as "social anxiety disorder" and "premenstrual dysphoric disorder"
as a way of selling the drugs that treat them. It sets up phony front
groups disguised as "patient advocacy organizations." It hires
ghostwriters to produce misleading scientific articles and then pays
academic physicians to sign on as authors. It sends paid lackeys and
shills out onto the academic lecture circuit to ''educate" doctors about a
drug's unapproved uses. It hires multinational PR firms to trumpet
dubious studies as scientific breakthroughs while burying the studies
that are likely to harm sales. It buys up the results of publicly
funded research. It maintains a political chokehold on the American
public by donating more money to political campaigns than any other
industry in the country. For many years the drug industry has reaped the
highest profit margins of any industry in America. In 2002, the top 10
American drug companies had profit margins of 17 percent; Pfizer, the
largest, had profit margins of 26 percent. So staggeringly
profitable is the drug industry that in 2002 the combined profits for the
top 10 drug companies in the Fortune 500 were greater than those of all
the other 490 companies combined.

For an excellent 10-page summary of this revealing book written by the
esteemed author, click here.
For additional reliable information on the health cover-up, click here.

A New Way to Fight Cancer?
2007-01-23, Newsweek

There are
no magic bullets in the fight against cancer: that's the first thing every
responsible scientist mentions when discussing a possible new treatment,
no matter how promising. If there were a magic bullet, though, it might be
something like dichloroacetate, or DCA, a drug that kills cancer cells by
exploiting a fundamental weakness found in a wide range of solid tumors.
So far, though, it kills them just in test tubes and in rats infected with
human cancer cells; it has never been tested against cancer in living human
beings. DCA ... is an existing drug whose side effects are well-studied and
relatively tolerable. Also, it's a small molecule that might be able to
cross the blood-brain barrier to reach otherwise intractable brain tumors.
Within days after a technical paper on DCA appeared in the journal Cancer
Cell last week, the lead author, Dr. Evangelos Michelakis of the
University of Alberta, was deluged with calls and e-mails from prospective
patients -- to whom he can say only, "Hang in there." DCA is a remarkably
simple molecule. It acts in the body to promote the activity of the
mitochondria. Researchers have assumed that the mitochondria in cancer
cells were irreparably damaged. But Michelakis wondered if that was really
true. With his colleagues he used DCA to turn back on the mitochondria in
cancer cells -- which promptly died. One of the great things about
DCA is that it's a simple compound, in the public domain, and could be
produced for pennies a dose. But that's also a problem, because big drug
companies are unlikely to spend a billion dollars or so on large-scale
clinical trials for a compound they can't patent. (Anyone interested
in helping can click here.)

Thank you Newsweek for publishing this important article. Why
haven't any other
U.S. media reported this major story? Notice how even
Newsweek acknowledges that the drug companies are not interested
in finding a cure for cancer if they can't make a profit from it.

Some suspect that the pharmaceutical industry has even suppressed cancer
cures found in the past. For one amazing example of this, click here.

UCSF study questions drug trial

2007-06-05, San
Francisco Chronicle
(San Francisco's leading newspaper)
Money talks
-- and very loudly -- when a drug company is funding a clinical trial
involving one of its products. UCSF researchers looked at nearly 200
head-to-head studies of widely prescribed cholesterol-lowering
medications, or statins, and found that results were 20 times more
likely to favor the drug made by the company that sponsored the
"We have to be really, really skeptical of these
drug-company-sponsored studies," said Lisa Bero, the study's author and
professor of clinical pharmacy and health policy studies. The trials
typically involved comparing the effectiveness of a drug to one or two
other statins. UCSF researchers also found that a study's
conclusions -- not the actual research results but the trial
investigators' impressions -- are more than 35 times more likely to favor
the test drug when that trial is sponsored by the drug's maker
Bero said drug companies fund up to 90 percent of drug-to-drug clinical
trials for certain classes of medication. The researchers found other
factors that could affect trial results. For example, pharmaceutical
companies could choose not to publish results of studies that fail to
favor their drugs, or they could be designed in ways to skew results. The
study found the most important weakness of trials was lack of true
clinical outcome measures. In the case of statins, some trials focused on
less-direct results such as lipid levels but failed to connect the results
with key outcomes such as heart attacks or mortality. "None of us really
care what our cholesterol level is. We care about having a heart attack,"
Gibson said. "For the drug to be worthwhile taking, it has to be directly
related to prevent a heart attack."

For lots more reliable information about corruption in the pharmaceutical
industry, click here.

Doctors Reap Millions for Anemia

2007-05-09, New
York Times
Two of the
world's largest drug companies are paying hundreds of millions of dollars
to doctors every year in return for giving their patients anemia
medicines, which regulators now say may be unsafe at commonly used doses.
The payments are legal, but very few people outside of the doctors who
receive them are aware of their size. The payments give physicians an
incentive to prescribe the medicines at levels that might increase
patients' risks of heart attacks or strokes. At just one practice
in the Pacific Northwest, a group of six cancer doctors received $2.7
million from Amgen for prescribing $9 million worth of its drugs last
[A] report prepared by F.D.A. staff scientists said
no evidence indicated that the medicines either improved quality of life in
patients or extended their survival.
Several studies suggested
that the drugs can shorten patients' lives when used at high doses. The
medicines ... are among the world's top-selling drugs. They represent the
single biggest drug expense for Medicare. Since 1991 ... the average dose
given to dialysis patients in this country has nearly tripled. About 50
percent of dialysis patients now receive enough of the drugs to raise
their red blood cell counts above the level considered risky by the F.D.A.
Unlike most drugs, the anemia medicines do not come in fixed doses.
Therefore, doctors have great flexibility to increase dosing – and
profits. The companies have [failed] to test whether lower doses of the
medicines might work better than higher doses. There is little evidence
that the drugs make much difference for patients with moderate anemia, and
federal statistics show that the increased use of the drugs has not
improved survival in dialysis patients.

For lots more on major corruption in health care, click here.

Le Mensonge peut courir un an, la vérité le rattrape en un jour, dit le sage Haoussa
Ma devise:
Revenir en haut Aller en bas
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur

 Sujets similaires

» [INFO] HSPL / RSPL pour HTC WP7 1ère génération (Team DFT)
» [INFO] [24 11 2013][RECOVERY] Team Win Recovery Project (TWRP) | Extended
» [INFO] Disponibilité du HD chez SFR???
» [INFO] mail2web devient payant !
» [INFO] Support Moto/vélo
Partager cet article sur : Excite BookmarksDiggRedditDel.icio.usGoogleLiveSlashdotNetscapeTechnoratiStumbleUponNewsvineFurlYahooSmarking

PEERS Team :: Commentaires

Re: PEERS Team
Message le Dim 24 Juin - 21:10 par mihou
Inside Medicine: Is your doctor giving you this
important number?

2007-05-05, Sacramento Bee (Leading
newspaper of California's capital city)
By Dr.
Michael Wilkes
. I recently wrote a column about cholesterol-lowering
medications. I stated that if 67 healthy men with elevated
cholesterol took a cholesterol-lowering drug ... for five years, only one
would benefit. The other 66 would not benefit, and it would cost about
$5,500 over the five-year period.
I received a ton of e-mail from
readers. Many readers wrote that after knowing this number, they did not
feel taking the drug was worth the effort or expense. Others took the
opposite view. Both interpretations are valid, depending on the person's
values. This number -- the 1 in 67 -- is a term doctors call "the number
needed to treat," or NNT. It is a relatively new concept [that] is
grossly underused in sharing information with the public. Doctors and
pharmacists do a poor job talking with patients about their medications.
Many people will derive little or no benefit from their medicines, but
they are never told this. The key is for doctors and patients to
understand the NNT. Here are some estimates of NNT: 1 in 2,550: The number
of breast cancer deaths prevented in women between the ages of 50 and 59
screened annually for five years with mammograms. 1 in 2,000: The number
of women ages 60-64 without risk factors who would prevent a hip fracture
by taking medicine for osteoporosis for five years. 1 in 700: The number
of people with mild high blood pressure who would prevent a stroke or
heart attack by taking blood pressure medicine for one year. 1 in 16: The
number of infections prevented by treating a victim of a dog bite with a
week of antibiotics. 1 in 7: The number of children (otherwise healthy
children) who benefit from treatment with an antibiotic for an ordinary
ear infection.

Many doctors and scientists have made valid claims that drug companies are
hyping disease in order to make profits on their drugs. For a top MD's
discussion of this vital topic, click here.

Under The Influence
2007-04-02, CBS News

If you
have ever wondered why the cost of prescription drugs in the United States
are the highest in the world or why it's illegal to import cheaper drugs
from Canada or Mexico, you need look no further than the pharmaceutical
lobby and its influence in Washington, D.C. Congressmen are
outnumbered two to one by lobbyists for an industry that spends roughly a
$100 million a year in campaign contributions and lobbying expenses to
protect its profits.
One reason [drug company] profits have
exceeded Wall Street expectations is the Medicare prescription drug bill
... passed three-and-a-half years ago. The unorthodox roll call on one of
the most expensive bills ever placed before the House of Representatives
began in the middle of the night. The only witnesses were congressional
staffers, hundreds of lobbyists, and U.S. Representatives like Dan Burton,
R-Ind., and Walter Jones, R-N.C. "The pharmaceutical lobbyists wrote the
bill," says Jones. Why did the vote finally take place at 3 a.m.? "They
didn't want [it] on national television in primetime," according to
Burton. "I've been in politics for 22 years," says Jones, "and it was the
ugliest night I have ever seen." Jones says the arm-twisting was
horrible. It certainly wasn't ugly for the drug lobby which ... has been
a source of lucrative employment opportunities for congressmen when they
leave office. In all, at least 15 congressional staffers, congressmen
and federal officials left to go to work for the pharmaceutical industry,
whose profits were increased by several billion dollars. "They have
unlimited resources," Burton says. "And when they push real hard to get
something accomplished in the Congress of the United States, they can get
it done."

This article also states that the Medicare prescription bill "was the
largest entitlement program in more than 40 years, and the debate broke
down along party lines." Usually Republicans are against
entitlement programs while Democrats support them. Why was it the opposite
in this case? Could it be that big industry made huge profits from the
passage of this bill? For lots more, click

Big Pharma snared by net
2004-09-26, The Observer (One of the
U.K.'s leading newspapers),,1312765,00.html
No one
foresaw ... the shocking extent to which the internet would change the
terms of trade between corporations and society. One of the world's
largest drug companies [was] the first victim. Britain's GlaxoSmithKline,
the world's second-largest pharma, denied any wrongdoing, but agreed to
pay $2.5m ... for concealing evidence of its antidepressant Seroxat's
potential for harming children, while doing them no measurable good.
Infinitely more frightening ... this pharma had the backing of
institutions that we, the public, rely on to protect us from poisoning by
prescription. The Royal College of Psychiatrists had insisted only a year
earlier that 'there is no evidence that antidepressant drugs can cause
dependence syndromes'. It was really the internet that allowed
public health activists to do an end run around GSK's and the medical
authorities' denials of the drug's risks. An explosion of websites
dedicated to vivid accounts of antidepressant reactions told these
campaigners about hundreds of thousands affected by a problem that
officially did not exist.
Health activists in Britain and
America have uncovered the core of pharma might. In both countries,
clinical drug tests are paid for by the pharmas, who tweak the trials'
design for the best possible results. Until recently, only the most
favourable findings got published in the 20,000-odd biomedical journals,
many of them dependent on pharmas for funding. The drugs are approved for
marketing by regulators, whose salaries are mostly financed by the
subjects of their evaluations. The medicines are then prescribed by
doctors routinely courted with pharma gifts ... meant to persuade them to
change their prescribing habits.

For a two-page summary with lots more reliable information on major health
cover-ups by a doctor who was editor-in-chief of one of the most
prestigious medical journals in the world, click here.

U.S. health care is bad for your

2007-06-03, San
Francisco Chronicle
(San Francisco's leading newspaper)
new] study ... finds that not only is the U.S. health care system the
most expensive in the world (double that of the next most costly
comparator country, Canada) but comes in dead last in almost any measure
of performance.
Although U.S. political leaders are fond of
stating that we have the best health-care system in the world, they fail
to acknowledge an important caveat: It is the best only for the very rich.
For the rest of the population, its deficits far outweigh its advantages.
[The] study compared the United States with Australia, Canada, Germany,
New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Although the most notable way in which
the United States differs from the other countries is in the absence of
universal coverage, the United States is also last on dimensions of
access, patient safety, efficiency and equity. The other five countries
considered spend considerably less on health care, both per capita and as
a percent of gross domestic product, than the United States. The United
States spends $7,000 per person per year on health care, almost double
that of Australia, Canada and Germany, each of which achieve better
results on health status indicators than the United States. The United
States also lags behind all industrialized nations in terms of health
coverage. 46.6 million Americans (about 15.9 percent of the population)
had no health insurance coverage during 2005. It is no wonder, then, that
medical bills are overwhelmingly the most common reason for personal
bankruptcy in the United States.

For a treasure trove of reliable information on health, click here.
Re: PEERS Team
Message le Dim 24 Juin - 21:10 par mihou
First, do no harm (to whites)
2006-12-31, San Francisco
(San Francisco's leading newspaper)
[Book Review
of] Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on
Black Americans From Colonial Times to the Present.
Washington opens the door on the torture room in "Medical Apartheid".
Experimental operations on the skulls of slave children, Washington
writes, were a favorite pursuit of a particularly sadistic South
Carolinian doctor named J. Marion Sims, widely revered today as the
"father of gynecology." For years, Sims experimented on a group of slave
women, to whom he refused anesthesia. The most notorious post-slavery
racial crime of American medicine [was] the Tuskegee Syphilis Study,
conducted by the U.S. Public Health Service between 1932 and 1972.
More than 100 black subjects ... were denied treatment, even and
especially after the discovery of penicillin in 1943. The research
required that they suffer and die, the more slowly the better.

Tuskegee was hardly unique. The Rockefeller Institute ... conducted a
study in 1910 that saw 470 black syphilitics injected with a deadly strain
of malaria. Black Americans were also disproportionately used ... as
subjects in government inquiries into the effects of radiation.
Washington's chilling history ends with contemporary case studies. At the
Incarnation Children's Center in New York, Columbia University doctors
continue to administer experimental AIDS drugs to minority orphans, even
after many develop painful and debilitating reactions. As for current
clinical trials in Africa, Washington describes the continent as the new
"laboratory for the West," where unsuspecting patients regularly receive
experimental therapies that might never receive state sanction in the
United States or Europe.

For more reliable, verifiable information on major corruption in the health
industry, click
here. It's also interesting to note that no
other major media chose to review this important book.

Doctors' Ties to Drug Makers Are Put on Close

2007-03-21, New
York Times

Allan Collins ... is president of the National Kidney Foundation. In 2004
... the pharmaceutical company Amgen, which makes the most expensive drugs
used in the treatment of kidney disease, underwrote more than $1.9 million
worth of research and education programs led by Dr. Collins. In 2005,
Amgen paid Dr. Collins at least $25,800, mostly in consulting and speaking
fees. The payments to Dr. Collins and the research center [are in records]
from Minnesota, the first of a handful of states to pass a law requiring
drug makers to disclose payments to doctors. The Minnesota records are a
window on the widespread financial ties between pharmaceutical companies
and the doctors who prescribe and recommend their products. From [1997]
through 2005, drug makers paid more than 5,500 doctors, nurses and other
health care workers in the state at least $57 million. More than 100
people received more than $100,000. Research shows that doctors who have
close relationships with drug makers tend to prescribe more, newer and
pricier drugs -- whether or not they are in the best interests of
patients. Drug companies "want somebody who can manipulate in a very
subtle way," said Dr. Frederick R. Taylor. Kathleen Slattery-Moschkau, a
former sales representative [said] "it all comes down to ways to
manipulate the doctors." Some of the doctors receiving the most
money sit on committees that prepare guidelines instructing doctors
nationwide about when to use medicines.
"It is critical that the
experts who write clinical guidelines be prohibited from having any
conflicts of interest," said Dr.
Marcia Angell, a former editor of The New England Journal of

This article only scratches the surface of legal and illegal corruption by
the powerful pharmaceutical industry. If you care about who really
controls our health system, don't miss Dr. Marcia Angell's incredibly
revealing essay showing the unbelievable wealth and influence of the drug
companies available

A change of heart changes

Ode Magazine, June 2005 Issue

institute demonstrates how people can actually make their heart beat
in a
healthier way.HeartMath's research shows that
emotions work much faster, and are more powerful, than thoughts. And that
-- when it comes to the human body -- the heart is much more important
than the brain to overall health and well-being. Briefly re-experiencing a
cherished memory creates synchronization in your heart rhythm in mere
seconds. Using a simple prescription that consists of a number of
exercises that anyone can do anywhere in a few minutes ... HeartMath is
successfully battling the greatest threat to health, happiness and peace
in this world: stress.
A successful anti-stress strategy provides
results precisely at the moment the stress is experienced. This is what
HeartMath does, which is why its client list now includes such leading
companies as Hewlett Packard, Shell, Unilever, Cisco Systems, and Boeing.
HeartMath ... has published a large body of scientific research in
established and respected publications such as the Harvard Business Review
and the American Journal of Cardiology. You can learn the techniques in
five minutes and get positive results if you do them a few times a day for
30 seconds. Feelings of compassion, love, care and appreciation produce a
smoothly rolling ... heart rhythm, while feelings of anger, frustration,
fear and danger emit a jagged ... image. When people experience love, they
not only feel happy and joyful, but they also produce ... the hormone that
prevents aging and gives us feelings of youthful vitality. HeartMath's
slogan -- a change of heart changes everything -- pretty much sums it up.
We can change the world, starting with ourselves.

Note: If the above link fails, click here. To visit
the inspiring website of the Institute of HeartMath, see

Visit our Health Information
Center for links to a variety of sources of

verifiable information dealing with other topics affecting your

For key news summaries on a host of other vital topics, click

Final Note: believes it is important
to balance disturbing cover-up information with inspirational writings
which call us to be all that we can be and to work together for positive
change. Please visit our Inspiration Center at
for an abundance of uplifting material.

See our archive of
revealing news articles at

Your tax-deductible donations, however large or small, help greatly to
support this important work.
To make a donation by credit card,
check, or money order:

these empowering websites coordinated by the nonprofit PEERS network:
- Every person in the world has a heart
- Reliable, verifiable information on major cover-ups
- Building a Global Community for All
- Strengthening the Web of Love that interconnects us all

Educational websites promoting transformation through information and
Re: PEERS Team
Message  par Contenu sponsorisé


Voir le sujet précédent Voir le sujet suivant Revenir en haut 

Page 1 sur 1

Permission de ce forum:Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Sauter vers: