Home

Dr Peter Gøtzsche exposes big pharma as organized crime

1 Comment

“The main reason we take so many drugs is that drug companies don’t sell drugs, they sell lies about drugs. This is what makes drugs so different from anything else in life… Virtually everything we know about drugs is what the companies have chosen to tell us and our doctors… the reason patients trust their medicine is that they extrapolate the trust they have in their doctors into the medicines they prescribe.

The patients don’t realize that, although their doctors may know a lot about diseases and human physiology and psychology, they know very, very little about drugs that’ve been carefully concocted and dressed up by the drug industry… If you don t think the system is out of control, please email me and explain why drugs are the third leading cause of death… If such a hugely lethal epidemic had been caused by a new bacterium or a virus, or even one-hundredth of it, we would have done everything we could to get it under control.”  (source

 

For more informative videos and free information visit http:drmcdougall.com Peter C. Gøtzsche, MD is a Danish medical researcher, and leader of the Nordic Cochrane Center at Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, Denmark. He has written numerous reviews within the Cochrane collaboration. Dr.Gøtzsche has been critical of screening for breast cancer using mammography, arguing that it cannot be justified; His critique stems from a meta-analysis he did on mammography screening studies and published as Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? in The Lancet in 2000. In it he discarded 6 out of 8 studies arguing their randomization was inadequate. In 2006 a paper by Gøtzsche on mammography screening was electronically published in the European Journal of Cancer ahead of print. The journal later removed the paper completely from the journal website without any formal retraction. The paper was later published in Danish Medical Bulletin with a short note from the editor, and Gøtzsche and his coauthors commented on the unilateral retraction that the authors were not involved in. In 2012 his book Mammography Screening: Truth, Lies and Controversy was published. In 2013 his book Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime: How Big Pharma has Corrupted Healthcare was published. http://www.cochrane.org/

 

Surgeons admit that mammography is outdated and harmful to women

Leave a comment

SOMEONE SOMEWHERE

From Beyond The Rainbow Somewhere

Every year, millions of women flock to their doctors to get their annual mammograms, a breast cancer screening procedure that involves pressing a woman’s breasts between two metal platforms to scope out tumors. But surgeons everywhere are starting to question the controversial practice, which studies show isn’t even an effective screening tool, and is actually harmful to the bodies of women who receive it.

The public is told that mammograms are the only way to catch breast cancer early, but a review of eight scientific trials evaluating the procedure, found that mammography is neither effective nor safe. After looking at data on more than 600,000 women between the ages of 39 and 74 who underwent the procedure on a routine basis, researchers found that many women are misdiagnosed. Many of these same women are consequently mistreated with chemotherapy, resulting in their rapid demise.

More

How Mammograms Increase Your Risk of Breast Cancer – Why Are They Promoted As A Prevention Tool?

Leave a comment

Collective Evolution

“Given the overwhelming amount of research showing the ineffectiveness of mammograms, the board recommended completely abolishing mammogram screenings. In addition, approximately 50 percent of women have dense breast tissue, meaning that it’s difficult for mammographs to even process. Both dense breast tissue and cancer appear white on an X-ray, thus it’s extremely difficult and practically impossible for a doctor to detect cancer with this type of tissue (source).”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

By CE Staff Writer

Early detection through mammography is often touted as the best way to prevent breast cancer. Women are constantly barraged with pink ribbon reminders that they need to get their mammography done, as it could potentially save their lives. It is recommended that women get a mammogram every second year after age 50, that being said, a mammogram cannot prevent cancer, but it can detect cancerous lumps.

Mammograms can also cause breast cancer.

Doesn’t this seem a bit backward? That we would use a method so regularly which can cause cancer to “prevent” cancer? There are much better prevention methods that we could be utilizing.

Yes, in many instances mammograms have detected cancerous tumors, but there are many other methods can do the same thing that aren’t carcinogenic, so why aren’t we using those methods? Oh right, because we are living in topsy turvy land where everything is is upside down. Cancer is a serious money making industry.

Related CE Article:  The True History of Chemotherapy & The Pharmaceutical Monopoly

6 Reasons Why Many People Think Chemotherapy & The Cancer Industry Is A Giant Scam

READ MORE HERE

 

 

Xrays, Mammograms, Ionizing Radiation Are Biggest Cause Of Breast Cancer; One Million Women Falsely Diagnosed With Big C Due To Mammography,

1 Comment

GREENMED INFO

BRCA, Followed Closely By Artificial Man Made Chemicals, Heavy Metals, Hormones

Xrays, Mammograms, Ionizing Radiation Are Biggest Cause Of Breast Cancer; One Million Women Falsely Diagnosed With Big C Due To Mammography, BRCA, Followed Closely By Artificial Man Made Chemicals, Heavy Metals, Hormones

Millions Fall Prey To This Deadly Breast Cancer Myth

1 Comment

logo-new“i.e. the conventional medical model – and the potentially devastating realization that they have succumbed to disfigurement and poisoning from unnecessary treatments, along with co-option by cause marketing campaigns – Breast Cancer Awareness Month; Pink Ribbons; Race for the Cure — encouraging them to act as brand ambassadors for breast cancer associated products and services, and drawing other otherwise healthy women into receiving unnecessary and/or dangerous diagnoses and treatments generated by screening programs.”

Author: Sayer Ji is the founder of GreenMedInfo.com, an author, educator, Steering Committee Member of the Global GMO Free Coalition (GGFC), and an advisory board member of the National Health Federation.

He founded Greenmedinfo.com in 2008 in order to provide the world an open access, evidence-based resource supporting natural and integrative modalities. It is widely recognized as the most widely referenced health resource of its kind.

___________________________________________________________

More

Healthcare scoring for the “dead pool”: hedge funds betting on how long you will live

3 Comments

Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved

_________________________________________

“The solution? A bond made up of life settlements would ideally have policies from people with a range of diseases — leukemia, lung cancer, heart disease, breast cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s. That is because if too many people with leukemia are in the securitization portfolio, and a cure is developed, the value of the bond would plummet.” 

_________________________________________

Those medical records that are now available to anyone and everyone who might have a financial interest in your “health” (the same records about you that you yourself can no longer gain access to in most cases),  are for sale to stakeholders, investors and interested party’s.  Insurance companies are particularly interested.

As we stated in an earlier article, when Obamacare is implemented it will establish a health score to be applied to your records and updated with each doctor visit. This score will be available to insurance companies with the accompanying medical data that will allow them to determine how much of a risk you pose to the profits they anticipate by insuring you under a hedge fund.

You will be rated as to how much of a risk you represent to the system.  This score is being used to determine what and how much healthcare you are eligible to receive.  As the bill clearly states, panels will determine what risk you pose to the system and weigh that against the odds you can recover, and if you do, what would be the value of your future contributions to society?  Odds not good?  Off to the dead pool you go!

Enter the insurance companies.  More

You can’t trust the FDA; US meat and milk banned around the world

3 Comments

Live link: Mercola.com

You cannot trust FDA, and I say this with a sense of overwhelming sadness but there’s an old French expression saying, “Anyone who is in danger should save himself.” “

Dr. Epstein________________________

One practice in particular makes most commercial meats potentially dangerous to your health, and that’s the practice of implanting cattle with sex hormones prior to entering the feed lot, about 100 days prior to slaughter.

This is done by implanting a pellet containing natural or synthetic sex hormones under the skin of the cattle’s ear. The objective is a financial one, as it increases the meat weight, and hence profits, by about 10 percent, for very little additional cost.

As a result, nearly all commercial meats contain very high levels of sex hormones. Either the natural hormones: testosterone, estrogen, progesterone, or the synthetic equivalent.

“Our meat poses increased risks of hormonal cancers, which have escalated since 1975. Breast cancer has increased by 25 percent, prostate cancer by 60 percent, and testes cancer by 60 percent,” says Epstein.

“Not surprisingly, U.S. meat is banned worldwide like rBGH milk. More

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: