April 6, 2012
By Mike Adams
“More proof that vaccines are just another money maker for big pharma.” –KTRN
For several years, NaturalNews has maintained that many vaccines actually cause the very infectious diseases they claim to prevent. Measles vaccines, for example, actually cause measles. And flu shot vaccines actually increase susceptibility to the flu. (See sources below.)
Now we have an open admission of precisely this point.
New research reported by Reuters reveals that whooping cough outbreaks are HIGHER among vaccinated children compared with unvaccinated children. This is based on a study led by Dr. David Witt, an infectious disease specialist at the Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in San Rafael, California.
As Reuters reports: (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/03/us-whoopingcough-idUSBRE832…)
In early 2010, a spike in cases appeared at Kaiser Permanente in San Rafael, and it was soon determined to be an outbreak of whooping cough — the largest seen in California in more than 50 years. Witt had expected to see the illnesses center around unvaccinated kids, knowing they are more vulnerable to the disease. “We started dissecting the data. What was very surprising was the majority of cases were in fully vaccinated children. That’s what started catching our attention.”
This same article also admits that these vaccines have never been tested for long-term effectiveness:
“GSK has never studied the duration of the vaccine’s protection after the shot given to four- to six-year-olds, the spokesperson said. Dr. Joel Ward at the Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute said it’s still important for parents to get their kids immunized, even though it doesn’t provide lasting protection from whooping cough.”
Huh? So let me get this straight:
• Whooping cough infections are MORE common among children already vaccinated against whooping cough than unvaccinated children.
• The whooping cough vaccines have NEVER been tested for long-term efficacy.
• Doctors openly admit the vaccine “doesn’t provide lasting protection” against the disease.
• But doctors and government authorities mindlessly push the vaccine anyway?!
That’s essentially like saying, “We know these vaccines don’t really work, but everybody should get vaccinated anyway.”
April 6, 2012
By Richard Knox
“There is only one reason that doctors make people go through worthless tests – can we say Cha-Ching.” –KTRN
Nine national medical groups are launching a campaign called Choosing Wisely to get U.S. doctors to back off on 45 diagnostic tests, procedures and treatments that often may do patients no good.
Many involve imaging tests such as CT scans, MRIs and X-rays. Stop doing them, the groups say, for most cases of back pain, or on patients who come into the emergency room with a headache or after a fainting spell, or just because somebody’s about to undergo surgery.
A child with low belly pain and suspected appendicitis? Don’t rush her to the CT scanner. Do an ultrasound first. That will give the answer 94 percent of the time, is cheaper and doesn’t expose the child to radiation.
Don’t put heartburn patients on high doses of acid-suppressing drugs when lower doses and shorter courses will do, they say. You might just be making their symptoms worse when they try to stop the medicine.
An apparently healthy middle-aged guy with few cardiac risk factors comes in for a yearly exam and wants to know how his ticker is. Don’t give him a full cardiac workup, with a treadmill test and fancy imaging. This kind of patient accounts for almost half of unnecessary cardiac screening.
Postpone repeat colonoscopies for 10 years if the first one is negative, or if it found and removed one or two early-stage colon polyps, the guidelines state. And stop prescribing antibiotics for mild-to-moderate sinus infections.
And here’s one that raises some tricky questions: Most patients who are debilitated with advanced cancer shouldn’t get more chemotherapy.
March 12, 2012
By Mike Barrett
“Not all doctors are this evil – some really do care. But you really need to be careful about who you go see regarding your health.” –KTRN
Medical doctors are nearly revered by many individuals for their medical knowledge accumulated after years of schooling. These doctors have gone through years of training in what is regarded as the western based medicine philosophy, where drugs and surgery are more or less their specialties. In addition to knowing virtually nothing about nutrition, natural solutions, and how to address the root causes of health conditions, many doctors, as well as scientist, have also been shown to be falsifying data in order to have research published. What’s more, many colleagues of the scandalous individuals are urged to keep quiet about what they know.
A survey of nearly 2,800 scientists and doctors in the UK has found that 13 percent of them admitted to witnessing the falsification and fabrication of data created by their colleagues. Additionally, 6 percent of the nearly 2,800 individuals surveyed were aware of research misconduct at their own workplace which had never been properly investigated to looked into. Needless to say, there could very well be more scientists or doctors not speaking up, further increasing the scandal rate.
Dr. Fiona Godlee, editor for the British Medical Journal, for which the poll was conducted, says:
“While our survey can’t provide a true estimate of how much research misconduct there is in the UK, it does show that there is a substantial number of cases and that UK institutions are failing to investigate adequately, if at all…The BMJ has been told of junior academics being advised to keep concerns to themselves to protect their careers, being bullied into not publishing their findings, or having their contracts terminated when they spoke out…This survey chimes with our experience where we see many cases of institutions not co-operating with journals and failing to investigate research misconduct properly.“
Interestingly enough, there is so much fraud occurring in the medical field that websites are popping up solely to target these numerous cases. Another medical fraud coming to light is the case involving Duke University and Anil Potti, a researcher formally known by mainstream medical experts for transforming cancer research for the better. However, the scientific papers published by Potti turned out to be completely falsified and skewered – a case showing and ultimately convincing many individuals that medical fraud can happen anytime and anywhere, even at high-status universities.
March 5th, 2012
By: Elizabeth Walling
Nearly 32 million Americans currently take statin drugs to lower their cholesterol levels, but they are probably completely unaware that these drugs can come with side effects like diabetes and memory loss. Why don’t they know? Because until this week, the FDA didn’t require these drugs to carry a warning of these possible dangers.
On Feb. 28 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced the need for new warnings for popular statin drugs like Lipitor, Zocor and Crestor. The new labels warn doctors and patients that statin drugs can cause hyperglycemia (i.e. high blood sugar levels) and increase the risk of developing diabetes.
The research linking cholesterol drugs with diabetes is well established. The connection was first reported in one 2008 study of nearly 18,000 Crestor patients. More research soon followed confirming the risk: one study in 2010 published in the Lancet, another in 2011 published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, and yet another in 2012 published in the Archives of Internal Medicine. That’s a whopping four studies in four years that all confirm statin drugs increase your risk of diabetes.
The FDA also added a warning that statins may cause memory loss and confusion in some patients. These side effects have been reported by some individual statin users, although no official research has been done to verify who is most at risk for memory loss while taking statins.
But the FDA says keep taking statin drugs despite risks
One can’t help wondering about the real purpose of these new statin warnings. The FDA recommends that doctors and patients discuss the risk of memory loss and diabetes, but they also say patients should keep taking these drugs. They don’t want you to throw the baby out with the bath water, so to speak.
“We want healthcare professionals and patients to have the most current information on the risks of statins, but also to assure them that these medications continue to provide an important health benefit of lowering cholesterol,” says Dr. Mary Parks from the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Apparently, we need to keep millions of Americans on statin drugs, but we just want to make sure they are aware that side effects like diabetes and memory loss are normal. Patients don’t need to be alarmed if they develop diabetes or experience memory loss while on cholesterol drugs. Their drugs came with warning labels reminding them that this is normal. And, of course, since this was stated on the warning label, lawsuits are definitely out of the question.
It sounds like Big Pharma doesn’t want you to throw their corporate profits out the window just because of some pesky side effects. These warnings are more about protecting their wallets more than protecting patients.
For The Full Report Go To Natural News
America’s quality of life is plummeting. KT is here is tell you about the crumbling American infrastructure and how you can personally weather the storm. Plus, get insider information on the U.S. government’s shady back room dealings.
Processed Food Lowers Kids’ IQ
How Do You Live To Be 110?
Use Your Mind To Heal Your Body
Why Almost Everything You Hear About Medicine Is Wrong
Doctors Go Their Whole Careers Without Assessments
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Click Below to Watch the Kevin Trudeau Show LIVE!
February 21, 2012
By Mike Barrett
“So many people think antibiotics cure disease. Little do they know that they wreak havoc on your digestive system – giving you a candida yeast overgrowth. You don’t need antibiotics. You don’t need any pharmaceutical drug – ever.” –KTRN
Antibiotics, like many other drugs, are handed out by doctors as an end-all solution pill. Even for viral ailments doctors irresponsibly prescribe these pills as a solution.
Unfortunately, with all of the over-prescriptions and even necessary prescriptions, antibiotics have routinely been creating drug-resistant bacteria.
Britain now seems to be facing their own massive increase in antibiotic-resistant blood poisoning caused by escherichia coli (E. coli).
Bugs and bacteria rapidly adapt to survive, only taking months for the genetic mutations to occur. Antibiotics, although successful in wiping out most of the bacterial invaders, don’t kill absolutely all of them. Over time the bacteria which survive the antibiotics become resistant, and continue to reproduce, only now with a quirk in their genetic structure allowing them to survive.
The slow but problematic growth of resistant organisms is resulting in antibiotics being nearly useless.
The Independent reports:
Using standard antibiotic regimens, there is a one in 10 chance that treatment of an E.coli infection will fail because the bug is resistant. But, as numbers of resistant infections rise, there will be increasing pressure to use more powerful antibiotics, called carbapenems, which are the last line available. And resistance to those is already emerging…The warnings follow increasing reports from Europe of patients with infections that are almost impossible to treat.
February 20, 2012
By Ethan A. Huff
“Here is a perfect example of why you should be seeing doctors who do not prescribe drugs or perform surgeries. In other words, see a naturopath first. They will encourage you to avoid vaccines.” –KTRN
Parents who refuse to allow their children to be forcibly injected with cocktails of toxic adjuvants, chemical preservatives, and live viral materials are increasingly being told by mainstream medical quacks that they are no longer welcome as their patients. Convinced that their own personal opinions on vaccines must apply to everyone, these vaccine-pushers have assumed the role of medical dictators, treating everyone who does not agree with their vaccine dogma as if they are unworthy to receive medical care.
According to a study conducted in Connecticut last year, the number of conventional practitioners and pediatricians that say they have dismissed patients because of vaccine refusal appears to be on the rise. While only six percent of physicians said they “routinely” dismissed families over vaccine refusal back in 2001 and 2006, that number appears to at least be in the double-digits today, with one survey of 133 doctors showing that about 30 percent of them have refused patients who resist vaccines.
Dr. Scott J. Goldstein and his partners from the Northwestern Children’s Practice in Chicago, for instance, now require all of their patients to comply with the practice’s vaccine requirements (http://www.cbsnews.com). And Dr. Allan LaReau and his 11 colleagues from Bronson Rambling Road Pediatrics in Kalamazoo, Mich., stopped working with all families that refused vaccinations back in 2010 (http://online.wsj.com).
The excuses for this blatant form of medical discrimination include many of the usual suspects. One of the most humorously irrational ones, of course, is the idea that unvaccinated children pose a disease risk to the vaccinated. The sheer insanity of this pseudoscientific nonsense would be humorous if it were not taken seriously by many so-called medical professionals today.
The vast majority of the vaccines administered to children in the first few years of their lives have never been proven either safe or effective, and yet self-professed experts like Dr. Goldstein and Dr. Lareau worship them as if they are some kind of magical cure for disease. Dr. Goldstein, in fact, told CBS News that he believes vaccines have “done more than anything else over the past 100 years to help improve the health of children,” an ideology that has no basis in reality.
February 17th, 2012
By: Carrie Gann
In the search for treatments to fight obesity, regulators are turning their attention to a diet drug that has already failed to receive government approval as a weight loss treatment.
Next week, a panel of advisors to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will consider whether or not to recommend the diet drug Qnexa for approval. The move is the latest attempt to give new tools to patients and doctors to fight the obesity that currently plagues one-third of Americans. It also fans a fiery debate about the search for a “magic bullet” alternative to difficult lifestyle changes to help obese people lose weight.
Qnexa was rejected by the FDA in 2010 over concerns about potentially dangerous side effects, such as cardiovascular problems and birth defects. Now, the FDA will consider whether or not the drug’s manufacturer, Vivus, should do a larger clinical trial to investigate the potential for cardiovascular side effects.
But some obesity specialists are, in effect, already giving the drug to their patients by prescribing Qnexa’s two major ingredients, phentermine and topiramate. The practice, called off-label prescribing, is not prohibited by the FDA. Doctors who have prescribed this combination say it has helped patients shed pounds when many other paths to weight loss have failed.
Dr. Ken Fujioka, director of the Center for Weight Management at Scripps Clinic in San Diego, said he often sees obese patients who have changed their diets, started exercising more and still have not been able to lose more than a few pounds. Though bariatric surgery is a lasting, effective option for long-term weight loss, many patients either aren’t morbidly obese enough to qualify for the surgery or are reluctant to resort to such a drastic measure to lose weight. For about 30 of these patients, Fujioka has prescribed low doses of phentermine and topiramate.
“The weight loss with this combination rivals bariatric surgery and I see using these meds in the seriously obese patient as an alternative,” Fujioka said.
Dr. Jana Klauer, a New York City-based doctor specializing in weight management, said her patients lost an average of 40 pounds when taking the drugs along with improved diet and exercise plans.
“The drug combination gives great results, providing diet and exercise are part of the plan,” she said.
Vivus, the company that developed Qnexa, said in a statement that the drug is a combination of low doses of both drugs and it is intended for use in combination with improvements in diet and exercise. Vivus said it does not support the off-label use of phentermine and topiramate.
The drugs work by suppressing appetite, and both have been approved by the FDA for other uses. Phentermine, a stimulant, is already approved for weight loss, but only for short-term use. Topiramate is an anticonvulsant, for which weight loss is a side effect.
But a laundry list of side effects has many experts concerned about the safety of the drugs, if taken over a long period of time. Topiramate creates feelings of mental fogginess, memory lapses and a lack of concentration.
Phentermine, one of drugs that made up the failed diet drug Fen-Phen, can lead to a range of cardiovascular side effects, such as high blood pressure, heart attacks and heart palpitations. Dr. David Katz, co-founder of the Yale University Prevention Research Center, noted that these side effects are the very problems caused by obesity.
Dr. Charles Clark, a professor of pharmacology and toxicology at Indiana University, said the potential side effects are enough to keep him from prescribing phentermine and topiramate to his patients, particularly in light of the failure of Fen-Phen, which was withdrawn from the market in 1997 after causing fatal blood pressure and heart valve problems in patients.
“Given our experience with Fen-Phen, we should be cautious in our use of these agents until larger and longer-term trials are completed,” Clark said.
Others say concerns about side effects of both drugs and their offspring Qnexa are legitimate, but could be managed or avoided if doctors carefully monitor patients while they’re taking the drug. For example, the FDA’s concerns about potential birth defects caused by Qnexa could be resolved by not prescribing the drug to women who could get pregnant. Many doctors say the risks of these drugs may be outweighed by the benefits for some patients with disabling health problems caused by obesity.
In the past 20 years, a parade of diet drugs have come before the FDA, representing an effort by drug companies to give obese patients and their doctors alternatives to difficult, often unsuccessful lifestyle changes. Most of the drugs have failed to meet the agency’s standards for safety and effectiveness. Many come with a list of embarrassing side effects, such as anal leakage, and only one, Alli, is approved for long-term use. A handful of drugs, such as Metabolife and Meridia, were removed from the market because of heart safety concerns.
Some doctors say there is no evidence that Qnexa will perform better than the diet drugs that have already flopped.
“I have made selective use of some weight loss drugs, but have not to date found much reason for enthusiasm for any of them,” Katz said. “I don’t have much for Qnexa.”
Others are more hopeful that Qnexa is different, including Dr. Chip Lavie, medical director of cardiac rehab and prevention at the Ochsner Clinic Foundation in New Orleans. He cites evidence from previous clinical trials that Qnexa helps patients lose a modest amount of weight, which improves their risk factors for diabetes, high blood pressure and other cardiovascular problems. He said cardiovascular and birth defect risks that the FDA cited in its first look at the drug were very slight and “clinically unimportant.”
“Considering the dismal results that many experience with attempted weight loss with diet and exercise, which is always the first choice, and the explosion in the need and use of bariatric surgery, this combination drug should be a major advance, and I hope that it gets approved this time by the FDA,” Lavie said.
For The Full Report Go To ABC News
February 16, 2012
By Mike Barrett
“Reject vaccines and your doctor fires you. Sounds like a win/win situation to us.” –KTRN
For many years government and health officials have been trying to push vaccination.
While childhood vaccine exemption rates have been increasing, we have been seeing an overall increase in the amount of people receiving the flu shot each year.
There have even been numerous occasions where legislators and others have called for mandatory vaccinations that could affect health care workers in particular.
In fact, many pediatricians are so angry with their patients who refuse vaccination that they are ‘firing’ patients and their families, refusing to play their role as doctor. That’s right, pediatricians are refusing to help parents — and their families — if they aren’t ‘responsible’ enough to vaccinate their children.
One study of Connecticut pediatricians found that some 30 percent of 133 doctors said they they refused to help a family due to vaccine refusal. Another survey of 909 Midwestern pediatricians found that 21 percent dismissed a family due to vaccine refusal.
While doctors are trained and told to ‘sell’ these vaccines, many people are becoming aware of vaccine dangers and risks. One study found that more than 1 in 10 parents are straying away from the traditional vaccine schedule, with the number to increase exponentially over the next few years.
For doctors to refuse care for those making a decision for their own health is irresponsible to say the least. Perhaps doctors should consider these truths about vaccines and the flu shot before ‘firing’ patients who refuse to be pricked.
Flu vaccines have been shown to be quite ineffective. They simply aren’t nearly as helpful as health officials make them out to be.
Vaccines suppress the immune system which could actually increase your risk for contracting the flu for weeks or months.
February 9, 2012
Do you trust your doctor? A survey finds that some doctors aren’t always completely honest with their patients.
More than half admitted describing someone’s prognosis in a way they knew was too rosy. Nearly 20 percent said they hadn’t fully disclosed a medical mistake for fear of being sued. And 1 in 10 of those surveyed said they’d told a patient something that wasn’t true in the past year.
The survey, by Massachusetts researchers and published in this month’s Health Affairs, doesn’t explain why, or what wasn’t true.
“I don’t think that physicians set out to be dishonest,” said lead researcher Dr. Lisa Iezzoni, a Harvard Medical School professor and director of Massachusetts General Hospital’s Mongan Institute for Health Policy. She said the untruths could have been to give people hope.
But it takes open communication for patients to make fully informed decisions about their health care, as opposed to the “doctor-knows-best” paternalism of medicine’s past, Iezzoni added.
The survey offers “a reason for patients to be vigilant and to be very clear with their physician about how much they do want to know,” she said.
The findings come from a 2009 survey of more than 1,800 physicians nationwide to see if they agree with and follow certain standards medical professionalism issued in 2002. Among the voluntary standards are that doctors should be open and honest about all aspects of patient care, and promptly disclose any mistakes.