Weapons of Mass Deception, the saga continues

[Guest guest]

> " WC Douglass " <realheath

> Weapons of Mass Deception, the saga

> continues

> Tue, 07 Sep 2004 08:39:34 -0400

>

> Daily Dose

>

> September 07, 2004

>

>

************************************************************

>

> Under rug swept

>

> Last Dose, I told you about how money-hungry minions

> of the federal

> government are engaging in a campaign of fear and

> manipulation to

> protect the interests of their drug-industry

> cronies. As if that

> weren't bad enough, consider this: The FDA is also

> protecting the drug

> biz from having to report the results of thousands

> of their medical

> studies!

>

> Here's the scoop: A 2002 FDA law stipulates that any

> clinical study of

> a treatment's effectiveness against serious disease

> — whether it's

> industry-sponsored, government-backed or independent

> in nature — must

> be listed as part of a publicly accessible database,

> ClinicalTrials.gov. And indeed, more than 90% of the

> studies conducted

> by entities like the National Cancer Institute and

> others are

> currently listed. Not a bad rate of compliance,

> right?

>

> Hold up a minute, though: According to a recent

> Associated Press

> article, the FDA's own reporting (which is no doubt

> hopelessly slanted

> in favor of the drug biz, mind you) shows that the

> pharmaceuticals

> industry's rate of compliance with this law is LESS

> THAN 50%. And

> what's even scarier than this little factoid is that

> the vast majority

> of drug-related disease studies are conducted by Big

> Pharma, yet only

> 13% of the research posted on ClinicalTrials.gov is

> from

> industry-funded studies! Think there's a little bit

> of research being

> swept under the rug here?

>

> How can this be, you're asking? Isn't this an

> automatic felony?

>

> Technically, yes, the drug-biz fat cats are felons

> for not coughing up

> the results of all their clinical drug trials — so

> the government

> COULD prosecute them for their blatant deception.

> There's only one

> small problem: The way the FDA drafted the law,

> there's NO PENALTY FOR

> BREAKING IT!

>

> Yep, that's right. When it wrote the law, the FDA

> made certain of its

> un-enforceability, thereby accomplishing two things:

> First, they made

> sure that drug companies won't have to tell anyone

> what they know

> about what their poisons are doing to us; and

> second, they gave

> themselves " plausible deniability. " It's brilliant —

> the FDA can point

> to all these guidelines and laws that seem to show

> they've got our

> best interests in mind, but the truth is that

> they're really designed

> to give their cronies a free pass! Diabolical, but

> brilliant.

>

> And it really makes you wonder what they're all

> trying so desperately

> to hide, doesn't it? More to come in the next Daily

> Dose…

>

>

************************************************************

>

> The PSA: Perennially Senseless Assay

>

> It's been a while since I've touched on this, but

> I'd revisit it every

> month if it meant keeping even one more man from

> having his prostate

> fried needlessly (yep, that's exactly what they do,

> too): As I've

> said, the PSA (Prostate Specific Antigen) test is

> useless at best,

> horrifically misleading at worst…

>

> And now, there's even more evidence supporting this

> assertion you've

> heard me make so often before.

>

> According to a Health article (no doubt

> reprinted with

> permission from the AP, Reuters, or some other

> outlet), a " disturbing "

> new study finds that fully 15% of older men whose

> PSA readings were

> considered perfectly normal had prostate cancer —

> some even with

> relatively advanced tumors! Of course, I've been

> saying for years that

> the PSA test is sloppy — it often finds cancer where

> there isn't any,

> and fails to detect it when it's aggressive!

>

> So what are the " experts " thinking of doing in

> response to this?

> Lowering the PSA's " normal " threshold. Great — now

> even more men will

> be undergoing the sometimes manhood-robbing surgery

> that often leaves

> them in diapers, many times needlessly.

>

> If only these moron MDs would follow up a " positive "

> PSA test with the

> one I've been crowing about for years, all this

> would be a moot point.

> It's called the AMAS (Anti-Malignan Antibody

> Screening), and it's

> safe, cheap, and more than 95% accurate at detecting

> cancer of any

> type. You can read up on it in more detail at

> www.amascancertest.com.

> If you've got an elevated PSA and your doctor

> doesn't know about this

> test, find one who does.

>

> Either that or stock up on Depends undergarments.

>

>

> The straight scoop you can always depend on,

>

> William Campbell Douglass II, MD

>

>

************************************************************