Are Prescription Drugs Designed to Make People Sick? : A Deduction

[Guest guest]

http://thecureforheartdisease.com/owen/idsue.htm

 

The Great Prescription Drug Hoax

 

Are Prescription Drugs Designed to Make People Sick?

 

A Deduction

 

By Owen R. Fonorow, Copyright 2004

 

 

 

 

" Dec 2003: Senior executive Allen Roses, of

GlaxoSmithKline, is quoted in a national newspaper as

stating that more than 90% of drugs only work in

30-50% of people. "

 

Medicine, impersonating science, has co-opted the word

" proof " to provide comfort to the gullible; in so

doing it has tarnished the reputations of science as

well as of medicine. When the medical profession

pretends that there is such a thing as scientific

proof, labeling their remedies as proven and decrying

unproven alternatives, it doesn't seem to be aware

that in physical science there are only guesses,

hypotheses, theories and even a few laws. Only

repeatable experiments determine truth. To the degree

that medicine relies on carefully conducted

experiments and collects data without preconceived

notions, (which can be duplicated and criticized by

other scientists), it follows generally accepted

scientific principles. Conclusions may be drawn, but

to imply that there are proven methods for controlling

disease, is to lie.

 

 

 

WHEN MEDICAL PROOF MEETS REALITY

 

The problem with a medical system based upon “proof”

is that, over time, people discover that unproven

remedies work and proven remedies may not. The common

cold is a good example. Millions have discovered that

there is a simple " cure " for the common cold, before

the virus takes hold. [*] The public may not be able

to verify for themselves whether or not medical

" science " is right about the likes of heart disease

and cancer, but thanks to Linus Pauling, many have

discovered that it is easy to stop the cold virus in

its tracks.

 

The public is becoming increasingly aware that

something is rotten in the state of medicine.

Generally, doctors are well-educated in the arts that

do not directly compete with prescription drugs, e.g.,

diagnosis, surgery and trauma treatment. Regrettably,

doctors receive little or no training in

non-prescription substances which are ignored by

medical authorities as unproven. When proven remedies

fail, and unproven remedies easily succeed, the

reputation of all scientists is unfairly harmed.

 

Linus Pauling is the prime example of a scientist

whose reputation has been unfairly impugned. The void

in medical school surrounding the therapeutic uses of

nutrients, especially vitamin C, is conspicuous and

can hardly be accidental. The result is that medical

doctors are losing their good reputations and fewer

patients are tolerating this nutrition-ignorance. In

1998, the AMA revealed that Americans made more visits

(above 100 million more) to alternative practitioners.

[*]

 

Most people, and almost all medical doctors, still

believe that prescription drugs are based in good

science, and that pharmaceutical companies offer them

in good faith. The truth, however, is not difficult

to uncover: Many top selling prescription drugs are

useless; some even cause the disease for which they

are prescribed. [*]

 

 

 

CLEANSING THE MEDICAL MIND

 

Doctors take lives into their hands and people want

to believe that medical care is infallible, despite

all the evidence to the contrary. We wish to believe

that science has proven remedies. It isn't pleasant to

hear drug company senior executives (truthfully) tell

the world that clinical trials are “generally useless”

and that most drugs do not work on most people as

advertised. Nor is it pleasant to learn that many

common medical procedures were never “proven” before

becoming adopted and generally accepted by the medical

profession.

 

It has been easy to condition the masses to accept

much nonsense in the name of science. Those who

believe that science has not discovered the cures for

primary chronic diseases, probably believe that the

following ‘truths’ are self-evident,

 

1. Cholesterol is the enemy.

 

2. Medicine/Cardiology is based upon strict science.

 

3. Medical Doctors, cardiologists and pharmaceutical

companies always behave in the patient's best

interest.

 

4. There is no connection between Heart Disease and

Vitamin C (or we'd all know about it.)

 

The problem is that doctors graduate from medical

schools convinced that there is little or no proven

therapeutic value to anything other than

“scientifically tested” prescription drugs. Why is it

that such bright people, skeptical about almost

everything, are not skeptical about the claims made

for the drugs they push? Are deliberate prevaricators

in control of medicine and medical curricula? One

thing is clear: Orthodox medical doctors do not offer

better, more effective, safer and much cheaper options

for treating chronic disease because they lack that

particular training and have no respect for the value

of " unproven " antioxidant, vitamin, mineral, amino

acid, and enzyme supplementation.

 

Any “conspiracy theory” implies that it has been

possible to deceive an entire profession, and to

brainwash the public, simply by the frequent use of

the word “science”. (There are the Quackbusters, who

work to discredit alternatives to prescription drugs;

including those who advocate such alternatives. It is

difficult to believe that the Quackbusters influence

medical classrooms and texts.) It hardly seems likely

that medical education could be so tightly controlled

that all doctors are cut from the same mold. In any

case, the nutrition-vacuum in orthodox medical

education is pervasive, serving more than one master.

The legal right to prescribe drugs, after all, is what

separates MDs from chiropractors and other physicians.

 

Whatever the reason, medical students truly believe

that their education is based upon the pursuit of

truth. However, the author has observed the

mind-control techniques used in medical schools, most

notably during classes on nutrition. These techniques

are often adopted and used by medical authorities and

writers in the media.

 

The first technique is to present any benefit of any

non-prescription substance in a way that casts doubt

upon its value. Authorities always use the words “may”

or “might” in conjunction with any nonprescription

substance and a therapeutic value. The positive

clinical responses to drugs are rarely qualified,

leading to a biased and highly distorted view of the

medical universe.

 

Nutrients are often ignored entirely in medical

school course materials, but if they must be covered

the professor will phrase sentences that create doubt

in the student's mind,

 

“Vitamin C may reduce endothelial dysfunction”

 

 

 

 

They cast little doubt as to the possible side effects

of vitamins.

 

“Vitamin C causes kidney stones.”

 

In one class, supposedly covering therapeutic

nutrition, there was a checklist on quacks included

with the course materials. This material implied that

anyone who prescribed more than the 10-times the

Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) of a vitamin was, by

definition, a priori a quack. (Vitamin C may be a poor

example. The reason I took the class was to learn

therapeutic nutrition, and vitamin C was not

mentioned, ever, during the entire semester!)

 

Another common technique is to imply that large,

extended and expensive studies are required before a

medical finding becomes “proven.” Medical students

are told repeatedly that pharmaceutical medications

are products of extensive research, and that only such

findings should be trusted.

 

Professors and medical textbook writers express

little doubt about positive clinical results of

prescription drugs:

 

 

 

“Cholesterol drugs are proven life savers.”

 

 

 

Again, even suggesting to medical students that

anything can be “proven” in science is a lie to begin

with, but this is what is taught. This conditioning by

medical authority figures during schooling builds

confidence in prescription drugs and reinforces the

idea that medical education is scientifically based,

and that the science of nutrition is second-rate or

even fraudulent.

 

To the medical student, remarkable claims for vitamins

and antioxidants seem fantastic and are easily

dismissed; curiosity, fundamental to good science, is

suppressed. It is ironical medical doctors consider

themselves firmly grounded in science believing they

are generally looked upon as authorities in the field

of human health.

 

These techniques work because no one wants to believe:

a) medical students are being brainwashed (certainly

not those misinformed medical students), or b) new

graduates are incompetent, or c) pharmaceutical

companies would promulgate known untruths regarding

matters so fundamental to human life and health.

 

This unfair treatment -- the absurd force-feeding of

‘selected’ information surrounding this main

competitor to prescription drugs -- nutrition science,

occurs in medical schools presently, and an enormous

amount of dangerous legal drugs are sold as the

result.

 

This deliberate withholding of beneficial information

has harmed all human beings. And it gets worse.

 

 

 

FAKE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

 

 

 

“The Big Lie is a finely tuned technique used with

great success by totalitarian regimes. A complete

falsehood is repeated. People come to believe it,

despite all arguments or evidence to the contrary.

Repetition is essential.“

 

 

 

Most people believe it reasonable to think that

science has failed, in that the cures for cancer and

heart disease are unknown. There is a growing number

of concerned scientists who question the claims being

made regarding pharmaceuticals, which generally treat

rather than cure disease. This skepticism of the

interpretations of medical science used to sell drugs

is bolstered from the observance that: Truth in

prescription drug advertising would irreversibly erode

sales. The dilemma facing pharmaceutical executives is

real. They are forced to lie -- tell the truth, go out

of business. Medical doctors, conditioned to accept

pharmaceuticals as products of rigorous science, have

become pawns of the pharmaceutical companies. Doctors

that legitimize the marketing and sale of ineffective

and dangerous prescription drugs, perhaps unknowingly,

cause injury and death of millions.

 

 

ANTACIDS - ONE $20 BILLION MARKET BEGETS ANOTHER $20

BILLION MARKET

 

The popular antacid drugs which totally block the

formation of stomach acid are an example of

prescription drugs that may cause harm. Could the

evolution of human beings be so imperfect that we

require a drastic reduction or elimination of stomach

acid? Drugs such as PrilosecÒ and NexiumÒ earn their

makers $20 billion. These “nuclear” acid-blockers

cause additional health problems by interfering with

normal digestion, problems that few would connect to

the antacids?

 

Research has substantiated the finding that antacids

interfere with digestion, cause poor nutrient

absorption and interfere with the “acid barrier” that

keeps lower tract bacteria in the lower tract.

Jonathan Wright, MD, claims that acid-blocking drugs

lead to increased rates of infection, nutrient

deficiencies and possibly blindness. [*]

 

Whether intentional or not, poor absorption of

minerals and other vital nutrients caused by the use

of antacids creates another $20 billion market -- the

antidepressant prescription drug market. For example,

when vitamin B12 is not absorbed, depression is often

the result.

 

 

GREAT STATIN DRUG HOAX

 

The most dangerous hoax has been the so-called

“statin” cholesterol-lowering drugs. These drugs are

sold to more than 25 million people worldwide, earning

their makers more than $20 billion dollars annually.

Touted as “life saving,” statin drugs cause heart

disease. These drugs weaken muscle, leading to heart

failure, and at high enough dosages without

antioxidant support, to heart transplant. These drugs

are the wrong prescription for anyone, much less heart

patients.

 

U.S. doctors are not warned that artifical HMG-CoA

reductase inhibitors (statins) also inhibit the

synthesis of coenzyme-Q10. With high statin dosages,

serum levels of CoQ10 inevitably decline which causes

muscle myopathy in many patients. The Merck

pharmaceutical company which sells Zocor Ò has several

1990 U.S. patents protecting the means to correct this

serious problem. Canadian advertisements for Lipitor Ò

and Zocor, but not U.S. ads, contain a warning about

CoQ10 depletion. (Again illustrating the power of the

huge pharmaceutical companies' influence in U. S.

governmental agencies.) Most medical doctors do not

know what coenzyme Q10 is, so they don't know of its

great importance in cardiovascular health. [*]

 

It's plain that the millions of statin users and their

doctors are unaware that ascorbic acid (vitamin C) is

important in the regulation of endogenous cholesterol

synthesis in man. It has been known since 1986 that

this vitamin, like the statin drugs, block the same

HMG-CoA enzyme that is required for the body to

mass-produce cholesterol. [*] Vitamin C deficiency

induces the body to produce more cholesterol. In 1992,

the world’s only twice-unshared Nobel Prize winner

made a video where he has stated, “heart disease is a

chronic vitamin C deficiency. " Pauling's thesis is

compelling and supported by conclusive laboratory

experiments. His brilliant, patented, nonprescription

cure for cardiovascular disease is readily available

to the public. [*]

 

It is difficult for reasonable people, especially

medical doctors conditioned to believe that

prescription drugs are well researched, to believe

that pharmaceutical companies would hide the truth

about matters of life and death, or that the FDA would

stand by and permit it. But it is common sense to

question the need for lowering cholesterol. As the

human species evolved to produce cholesterol in large

quantities, why does the liver make more cholesterol

if the intake declines? If these statin drugs are so

beneficial, why is cardiovascular disease still the

leading cause of death in the USA, and why do the

authors and researchers of the most recent statin

studies keep their raw mortality data secret?

 

If one stops and considers these findings, he/she may

realize that artificial cholesterol lowering, by

itself, is unlikely to improve health or increase

their longevity. Studies have shown that the so-called

statin drugs, as is the case with many prescription

drugs, do more harm than good. Better results occur

with concurrent antioxidant usage, but this knowledge

is deliberately kept clouded. Statin cholesterol

lowering drugs are products of the best science money

can buy. They seem to have been designed to create an

even larger market for medical care. Their marketing,

which doctors fail to question, contains distortions,

half-truths, and deceit.

 

A BRILLIANT SUGGESTION FROM AN A -BOMB SCIENTIST

 

A true scientist and National hero, ninety-nine (99)

year-old retired physics professor Theodore P.

Jorgensen, Ph.D. (Harvard) worked at Los Alamos on the

atomic bomb during World War II. In 2003, Dr.

Jorgensen presented his novel idea that would save the

United States billions in prescription drugs and

health care: Have the Federal Government provide

ascorbic acid (vitamin C) free to all citizens. Dr.

Jorgensen writes in private correspondence,

 

 

 

...for many years research using ascorbic acid was

done using very small amounts of the substance. It

took many years before it was discovered that ascorbic

acid could be used to produce fabulous results when

used correctly in medical and clinical research. .. "

 

It was discovered that most animals produce their

own ascorbic acid and that human beings, apes,

monkeys, and guinea pigs could not make any at all.

The conclusion of the thinking on this problem was

that those animals which could not make ascorbic acid

had a genetic defect involving one enzyme which was

lost millions of years ago because ascorbic acid was

so easy to obtain in the foods then available.

 

“In order to obtain this amount of ascorbic acid a

human being should have, work was done to find what

other animals made for their own use. The result of

this study put the value of ascorbic acid at 2.3 to 10

grams per 154 pound man in good health.

 

“It is virtually impossible for any person to

obtain this much ascorbic acid per day from ordinary

or casual ways. This also indicates that human beings

are living with dangerously low levels of ascorbic

acid. The above information gives some idea of the

reason our cost of health care is so high and our

average age of death is so low. This problem is a

national disgrace and should be attacked on a national

basis. There are two reasons why this should be done.

 

“One reason is that a free supply of ascorbic acid

to every person would lower the cost of health care in

a major way.” - Theodore P. Jorgensen [Full Text of

Letter]

 

 

 

CORRECT MEDICAL TRAINING BEFORE MDs BECOME DINOSAURS

 

Organized medicine has created the public image that

it is based upon “science” but apparently it does not

understand the meaning of the word. The misuse of the

word 'proof' puts the work of trained scientists at a

public-relations disadvantage; true scientists would

never use that word as descriptive of remedies.

Medical doctors trained in the United States should

become skeptical and take action accordingly. Doctors

should band together and bring legal action against

their medical schools (before the entire profession is

sued for mass murder.) Other culpable entities may

include the medical professional societies, medical

journals and the large pharmaceutical companies. As

long as the current medical curricula are influenced

by pharmaceutical interests there is little hope of

low-profit nutritional science getting a fair hearing

in medicine. One way to stir up the establishment is

for doctors to sue their former schools on the basis

of the cost of their eduction, but what they were not

taught. The ignornance of nutrition promoted by U.S.

medical schools breaches an implied contract and may

constitute a legal definition of fraud.

 

 

Owen Fonorow, Naturopath, Ph.D.

Vitamin C Foundation

PO Box 3097, Lisle IL 60532

www.VitaminCFoundation.org

630-416-1438

 

BolenReport.com

PaulingTherapy.com

Hearttechnology.com

VitaminCfoundation.org