Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

How the FDA killed 60,000 people!

Amen. The FDA is corrupt and paid off by drug companies. Remember, in the United States it's illegal to say vitamin C is a cure for scurvy
 
sock said:
Vioxx didn't kill anyone. They died of stroke or heartattack. The legal system is determining whether viox contributed to death's or not. So far Merck won 9 lost 5.
Click to expand...

It is true that vioxx, as a non-sentient being did not willfully kill anyone.

It is also true that some 164,000 people who took Vioxx had heart attacks.

So ultimately, the people who manufacture and distributed Vioxx MERCK, also foisted Vioxx upon many doctors as an alternative to NSAID related therapies. which were known to cause stomach bleeding in chronic pain management patients.

Now, It is a legal matter of debate whether MERCK promoted this drug as generally regarded as safe, when they knew that preliminary testing had indicated an abnormal amount of test subjects were experiencing heart related issues.

It may be assumptive to say that MERCK killed 60,000 people, because that would imply intent.

However it is quite correct to state that the FDA through it own bureaucratic incompetence indirectly caused the deaths of 60,000 people. It is clear that when an organization is created to help protect US citizens from unsafe drugs, does not protect them from these drugs, when it was well with in their power, they are complicit in any damages that occur from these drugs.

The legal precedents are based on seeking damages from the drug manufactures as they are more vulnerable to litigation because of their public wealth.

MERCK should legally pursue action against the FDA., to logically deffer any damages that the FDA were complicit is creating.

Why MERCK does not pursue legal action is the crux of the problems that face the FDA. Which are the illegal practices of payola between the drug companies and the FDA testing labs.
if these practices were to be proven in court, the FDA would cease to exist, which in turn would kill the "golden goose" for the drug companies. They just "take the pipe" on the law suits and then either write the damages off as operating costs or bury them in the research and development of the next Vioxx replacement drug.
 
anabolicrhino said:
MERCK should legally pursue action against the FDA., to logically deffer any damages that the FDA were complicit is creating.

Why MERCK does not pursue legal action is the crux of the problems that face the FDA. Which are the illegal practices of payola between the drug companies and the FDA testing labs.
if these practices were to be proven in court, the FDA would cease to exist, which in turn would kill the "golden goose" for the drug companies. They just "take the pipe" on the law suits and then either write the damages off as operating costs or bury them in the research and development of the next Vioxx replacement drug.
Click to expand...

I agree, Merck can't sue the FDA. These people should also sue the FDA. As for the costs, they are covered in a number of ways: jobs are reduced, prices of other drugs are artificially high, R&D budgets are held firm, outsourcing, etc. I must admit I am biased due to my employement. There are many genuine scientists who are interested in the overall well being of human kind. We are hardly in the business of designing compounds that harm people. (always remember, there is no free lunch; there is alway some consequence of taking something that changes your bodies natural response to an indication and not always immediately self-evident). Obviously I can not speak for all scientists. Also, Merck is a business, and utimatley its resposnability is to its shareholders - $$$$. I would also be naive to say that all intentions were in the interests of the patient. Where ever large amounts of money are to be made, corruption or improprities exist in any business. I always feel the need to defend pharma, it so easy to point the finger at big pharma. We are not all bad.

One more thing, if goverment was taxing prescription drugs, I am sure they would be even more lenient on pharma. The best example of this is cigarettes. It is amazing the amount of people that die from smoking's contributions. Based on the all the data, smoking should be banned. Government can't give up the tax revenue.

Anyway, I appreciate your well thought out post/response, which contains many good points!
 
hey the fda says the same thing regarding ephedra but i notice how efedrine hcl wich i would think is the same thing just chemical cousin ! so wich is it ephedra kills and ephedrin hcl doesn't....hmmm sounds like the companys that have stock in ephedrine hcl in cold/breathing meds are behind a false reason for banning ephedra !
 
WATERLOGGED said:
hey the fda says the same thing regarding ephedra but i notice how efedrine hcl wich i would think is the same thing just chemical cousin ! so wich is it ephedra kills and ephedrin hcl doesn't....hmmm sounds like the companys that have stock in ephedrine hcl in cold/breathing meds are behind a false reason for banning ephedra !
Click to expand...

The distributor I used to get ephedra from told me that **** Cheany's family owned one of the main companies that sells the ephedrine. I have not been able to confim that though, so if anybody else knows one way or the other...

It would be in his interest to get ephedra off the market.

But would **** really pull strings to do something like that?? Nah! LOL
 
WATERLOGGED said:
hey the fda says the same thing regarding ephedra but i notice how efedrine hcl wich i would think is the same thing just chemical cousin ! so wich is it ephedra kills and ephedrin hcl doesn't....hmmm sounds like the companys that have stock in ephedrine hcl in cold/breathing meds are behind a false reason for banning ephedra !
Click to expand...

ephedrine HCl is just a salt form of ephedra. they are they same, one just has a salt added to it.
 
sock said:
Vioxx didn't kill anyone. They died of stroke or heartattack. The legal system is determining whether viox contributed to death's or not. So far Merck won 9 lost 5.
Click to expand...

Yes, knives dont kill people either, they die of blood loss.
 
This video really helps expand on the history of the medical establishment and why it is so incredibly corrupt.

Invalid Link Removed

Try to ignore the crappy music and visuals at the beginning. :)
 
Aeternitatis said:
This video really helps expand on the history of the medical establishment and why it is so incredibly corrupt.

Invalid Link Removed

Try to ignore the crappy music and visuals at the beginning. :)
Click to expand...

My IQ fell considerbly after watching that.

There is some things he is saying which I dont know are true or not, but I do know that some of the other things he is saying are complete bull****.
 
ItsHectic said:
My IQ fell considerbly after watching that.

There is some things he is saying which I dont know are true or not, but I do know that some of the other things he is saying are complete bull****.
Click to expand...
Give an example.
 
Aeternitatis said:
Give an example.
Click to expand...

"chemotherapy doesnt work" "reports are published that people are cured when really we dont know that"

A good example of how naturopathic medicine doesnt compete with mainstream medicine, is that we here in this forum know of almost every natural AI, yet they just dont compete with nolvadex or arimidex. If natural medicine was what he tries to make it out to be, people here wouldnt be doing tren and test cycles or using nolvadex, everyone would be using anabolic pump etc. And steroid cycle PCT would consist of rebound reloaded, ZMA and 6oxo, not nolvadex or clomid and HCG.
 
ItsHectic said:
"chemotherapy doesnt work" "reports are published that people are cured when really we dont know that"

A good example of how naturopathic medicine doesnt compete with mainstream medicine, is that we here in this forum know of almost every natural AI, yet they just dont compete with nolvadex or arimidex. If natural medicine was what he tries to make it out to be, people here wouldnt be doing tren and test cycles or using nolvadex, everyone would be using anabolic pump etc. And steroid cycle post cycle therapy would consist of rebound reloaded, ZMA and 6oxo, not nolvadex or clomid and HCG.
Click to expand...

good point
 
ItsHectic said:
"chemotherapy doesnt work" "reports are published that people are cured when really we dont know that"

A good example of how naturopathic medicine doesnt compete with mainstream medicine, is that we here in this forum know of almost every natural AI, yet they just dont compete with nolvadex or arimidex. If natural medicine was what he tries to make it out to be, people here wouldnt be doing tren and test cycles or using nolvadex, everyone would be using anabolic pump etc. And steroid cycle post cycle therapy would consist of rebound reloaded, ZMA and 6oxo, not nolvadex or clomid and HCG.
Click to expand...
That hyperbole does not in any way fit the context of the arguement. Your eample of synthetic AI's being used inconsistent with labeling guidelines has nothing to do with the man's stance on the state of the medical establishment and FDA (not to mention you seem to conveniently leave out the well known drawbacks to synthetic AI's).
 
Aeternitatis said:
That hyperbole does not in any way fit the context of the arguement. Your eample of synthetic AI's being used inconsistent with labeling guidelines has nothing to do with the man's stance on the state of the medical establishment and FDA (not to mention you seem to conveniently leave out the well known drawbacks to synthetic AI's).
Click to expand...

What I was talking about had nothing to do with the FDA, Only what he is saying in general. I cant give him any credit about anything because some of the things he is saying is just ridiculous.
I think its absurd the way the FDA is run, but to say naturopathic medicine is the way to go is going too far.
 
I agree, this country is fun by money, and corrupt micromanagment. The FDA protects large corporations moreso than the public. Knowledge is power, noones gonna figure it out better than yourself. research... PREVENTION IS KEY, Treatment is a relatively unsure science...
 
ItsHectic said:
What I was talking about had nothing to do with the FDA, Only what he is saying in general. I cant give him any credit about anything because some of the things he is saying is just ridiculous.
I think its absurd the way the FDA is run, but to say naturopathic medicine is the way to go is going too far.
Click to expand...
So your qualms lie in the man's promotion of naturopathy?
And to use your own example: naturopathy is not "the way to go" because it fails to produce the unnatural growth of musculature that synthetic anabolic steroids and subsequent synthetic AI usage can produce? In other words, you do not support naturopathy because it cannot elicit physiological states--states that would otherwise never be created by the natural, healthy functioning of the human body--that are desired by the user of a particular pharmaceutical? You feel that it is healthy for people to strive for a state of being that can only be mediated by synthetic chemicals?
 
Aeternitatis said:
So your qualms lie in the man's promotion of naturopathy?
And to use your own example: naturopathy is not "the way to go" because it fails to produce the unnatural growth of musculature that synthetic anabolic steroids and subsequent synthetic AI usage can produce? In other words, you do not support naturopathy because it cannot elicit physiological states--states that would otherwise never be created by the natural, healthy functioning of the human body--that are desired by the user of a particular pharmaceutical?
Click to expand...

Not his promotion of naturopathy but the way he dismisses medicine and makes it out to be quackary, he sounds like such a fool making such poor statements and responses to some of those questions that I cant take anything he says seriously.

I think you are missing my point, I was using anabolics use as an example, and I never said I dont support naturopathy, I just dont think it can replace medicine.
You are taking things way out of context.
Nolvadex and arimidex where both invented to treat breast cancer, and even they are sometimes not strong enough AIs to do there labelled job properly, so how do you expect all natural stuff to stack up in the real world? The whole point of medicine is to change physiological states that would otherwise never be created naturally.

You feel that it is healthy for people to strive for a state of being that can only be mediated by synthetic chemicals?
Click to expand...
Thats got nothing to do with it.
 
ItsHectic said:
Not his promotion of naturopathy but the way he dismisses medicine and makes it out to be quackary, he sounds like such a fool making such poor statements and responses to some of those questions that I cant take anything he says seriously.
Click to expand...
I can dig it.
But perhaps his extremism is just balancing the scales. There are MANY people in the western (modern) medicine industry who use the same kind of sensationalism to try and defame naturopathy. Although I feel many of the guy's points are completely valid, his tone may not have been appropriate. But like I said... just balancing the scales.

As for the breast cancer thing: you're assuming that breast cancer can be cured with an AI. We all know that western medicine does not cure, it doesn't even try. Its stated goal has always been to treat or relieve symptoms. So, it's hard to say whether naturopathy can or can't replace modern medicine-- at least from a philosophical standpoint since modern medicine does not aim to end disease, just to make it more comfortable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top