conflict of interest

Vaccines, Mercury, Autism and a Compromised Fourth Estate

Posted on by hk80u

The quote?

“Three weeks ago we put a report on our website for mothers to send us stories trhat are much like Bob’s story and much like the story that you are going to hear from Nico Lahood – that they brought their perfectly healthy child in for a wellness visit, and the child got a series of shots, some of them probably containing thimerosal, the child spiked a fever that night, 105 degrees, had seizures and within three months was brain-dead.  Now we said – we put out just on our web site, ‘Tell us if you have that story.’  Within 13 hours we had 6,100 women send us details of their particular story.  And that’s what’s in these books.

It is not science.  What we have been told is not science.  It’s more akin to religion.  It’s an orthodoxy, that it can’t be challenged, it’s a taboo to talk about it, that anybody who talks about it is a heretic and has to be harmed, marginalised or called an ‘anti-vax’.  And yet you know, one of these stories is not science; two of them are not science;  it’s anecdote.  But 6,100 of them?  No, ultimately science is, are, case studies.  That’s science.  And this is 6,100 case studies here.

And you have to ignore, like all case studies – this orthodoxy is anti-science, it’s cruel, it’s sometimes lethal and it’s misogynistic.  It requires anyone who adopts this orthodoxy to say that all these women who say they know what happened to their child – that these stories have to be dismissed, that these stories are the stories of hysterics, that they’re wrong, that they don’t know what the saw, that we know better than they do what they saw, and what they saw with their child.  And that is misogynistic.  And that’s what it takes.

What Bob and I are announcing today is – we know that journalists don’t want to look into the science, but we are going to offer a $100,000 reward, a $100k challenge, to any journalist – or anybody else – who can come up with a single – who can point to a single existing study that says it’s safe to inject mercury into little babies or pregnant women at the levels that we are currently injecting them in the flu vaccine.”

 

The source? 

Robert Kennedy Jr, head of the World Mercury Project: Address to the National Press Club in Washington, Wednesday 15 February 2017   ( https://worldmercuryproject.org/livestream )

 

My observations?

  • The entire presentation is well worth watching.  (Kennedy’s piece starts at 6:9 minutes in, stops at about 30:0.)
  • The Forth Estate is found wanting in its oversight and truth-telling role, and the evidence points to a conflict of interest.
  • A whistleblower in the Centres for Disease Control  (CDC) claims a sustained pattern of suppression and deliberate misrepresentation of scientific evidence, and points to a conflict of interest.
  • Merck, the leading manufacturer of vaccines, is in the cross-hairs.   Merck is one of just eighteen companies identified by Jim Collins and Jerry Porras in their 1994 book Built to Last as ‘visionary.’ The authors defined a visionary company as ‘one that is a premier institution in its industry, is widely admired by knowledgeable businesspeople, made an imprint on the world, had multiple generations of Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), had multiple product/service life cycles, and was founded before 1950.’
  • Not everyone shares that admiration.  For example:  in 2007, three years after withdrawing its pain medication Vioxx from the market, Merck agreed to pay $4.85 billion to settle 27,000 lawsuits by people who claim they or their family members suffered injury or died after taking the drug.  The suits covered more than 47,000 separate parties.  (NYT, 9 Nov 2007)
  • If you were a Merck director or senior executive, what might be keeping you awake at night?

 

This scam is a disgrace

Posted on by hk80u

The quote?

For years, the US – and the rest of the Western world—has afforded a climate in which Attorneys General and Senators and Secretaries of State and even Presidents can conspire with university professors and heads of government science institutions and environmental PR companies and green NGOs can exploit green issues in which to wage continual war on both the economy and the consumer, often enriching themselves in the process while the rest of us get poorer and more constrained by needless taxes and regulations.     …….

This scam is a disgrace and has gone on far too long.

 

The source?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/23/trump-versus-the-green-blob-the-biggest-science-scam-in-history

 

My observations?

  • There are strong differences of opinion on all sorts of things.  They persist, regardless of educational level or intellect.
  • What we espouse, is affected both by what we believe personally, and by what we perceive that others around us believe.
  • To speak of ‘the science of climate change’  as if it’s unambiguous, stable, complete, or unanimous, is to reflect an ignorance of science itself.
  • All life forms, plant and animal, respire.  They take in oxygen and glucose;  and they give out carbon dioxide and water (and energy).  Plants also photosynthesise (while there is daylight).  Photosynthesis is respiration in reverse.  Plants take in carbon dioxide and water (and energy), and they give out oxygen and glucose.  Without carbon dioxide, there’d be no oxygen.  Sort of takes your breath away, doesn’t it.
  • There is a tide in the affairs of men.  James Delingpole, the author of this piece, refers to a ‘tipping point’, and to ‘a dramatic shift’.  Time will tell.  The challenge for the strategists is whether to move ‘against the tide’, or to wait until the run is obvious.
  • We are talking big business.  Huge.  According to Delingbole, ‘the global decarbonisation industry alone is worth at least $1.5 trillion a year.’  For some it’s a conscience issue, and a policy issue.  For some it’s an expense.   For some others it’s a revenue line.  And for others again, it is all of the above.

Life expectancy in the US is now falling.

Posted on by hk80u

The quote?

  • For the first time in two decades, life expectancy has declined in the U.S. — a consequence of obesity and rising rates of eight leading causes of death, including heart disease, diabetes, dementia and opioid addiction
  • The decline in life expectancy is primarily caused by a rise in several categories of preventable deaths, highlighting the failure of the American health care system to properly address the root causes of chronic disease
  • Half of Americans are living with chronic illness, and the cost of health care now accounts for 17 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product


The sources?

  • http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/12/21/obesity-opioid-role-american-declining-lifespan.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20161221Z3&et_cid=DM128906&et_rid=1806330573
  • https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending


My observations?

  • At 17% of GDP, health care is a big ticket item.  Huge.
  • My perspective about that big ticket item will reflect whether I am a consumer of those services, a provider, or a funder.  Each of us is probably at least the first and the last.  We might well be all three.
  • If we believe (to quote Ralph Waldo Emerson) that “The first wealth is health”, we personally will be making appropriate lifestyle choices that foster health, and these will have the effect of reducing our consumption of health care.  The majority however appear to be making other personal choices.
  • If I am a tax payer, or legislating on their behalf, I will be looking at both the cost of relevant public health initiatives, and their effectiveness.  The US federal budget for fiscal 2015 was $3.8 trillion.  Of that total, 27.4% was Medicare and health – putting it ahead of Military, and second only to Social security.
  • The evidence suggests ‘the failure of the American health care system to properly address the root causes of chronic disease’.  Think What we eat, What we drink, How we think, Whether we exercise.
  • If I am a provider of health care products or services, or what some have termed the illness industry, I might think of that 17% as a revenue line rather than a cost.