Third of WHO advisers received support from drug firms

sligopark · 14-08-2010 8:57pm

Alistair Swift Tea wrote: »

Jesus.. Shouldn't a board like that be completely impartial?!
They're recommendations cost millions.

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Billions my friedn and its not limited to the swine flu

Worse still our gps and nurses etc are all sucked into the big drug 'em drug 'em and then inject them propoganda of for profit drug producers and peddlars

gps and nurses are the equivalent of on the street drug dealers

bleg · 14-08-2010 11:31pm

sligopark wrote: »

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Billions my friedn and its not limited to the swine flu

Worse still our gps and nurses etc are all sucked into the big drug 'em drug 'em and then inject them propoganda of for profit drug producers and peddlars

gps and nurses are the equivalent of on the street drug dealers

What?

sock puppet · 14-08-2010 11:44pm

sligopark wrote: »

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Billions my friedn and its not limited to the swine flu

Worse still our gps and nurses etc are all sucked into the big drug 'em drug 'em and then inject them propoganda of for profit drug producers and peddlars

gps and nurses are the equivalent of on the street drug dealers

The sad thing about conspiracy theorists like you is that it actually results in the deaths of many many people.

sligopark · 14-08-2010 11:55pm

of course I do - I am getting paid by pharmaceutical companies to create panic and wealth

And I am stupid enough to believe them - hook, line and sinker

the medical profession really should be ashamed of itself in this saga

15-08-2010 12:06am

sligopark wrote: »

of course I do - I am getting paid by pharmaceutical companies to create panic and wealth

And I am stupid enough to believe them - hook, line and sinker

the medical profession really should be ashamed of itself in this saga

I wonder if you'll change your tune about the medical profession and pharmaceutical companies if and when you ever need urgent medical assistance.

sligopark · 15-08-2010 12:14am

A&E assistance is great and more technology driven - its when it comes to the lazy day to day drugging and vaccinating that the medical profession and the WHO falls down, listening heartily to vested interests

15-08-2010 12:16am

sligopark wrote: »

A&E assistance is great and more technology driven - its when it comes to the lazy day to day drugging and vaccinating that the medical profession and the WHO falls down, listening heartily to vested interests

Google smallpox.

sligopark · 15-08-2010 12:24am

Deleted User wrote: »

Google smallpox.

Just did and interestingly came on this quote (although not referenced):

I have read many interesting articles about how... the only people in Philippines who died of smallpox were the vaccinated,

http://naturesmother.myfreeforum.org/viewtopic.php?p=50

Although I do take your point but I do not know much past the vaccine PR about smallpox

Dave! · 15-08-2010 12:36am

sligopark wrote: »

Just did and interestingly came on this quote (although not referenced):

http://naturesmother.myfreeforum.org/viewtopic.php?p=50

Although I do take your point but I do not know much past the vaccine PR about smallpox

Then why even post it?

Interestingly I myself read a quote, not referenced though:

'Anti-vaccination' people only use 10% of their brains

Make of it what you wish

15-08-2010 12:37am

sligopark wrote: »

Although I do take your point but I do not know much past the vaccine PR about smallpox

It has been eradicated through extensive vaccination programmes.

sligopark · 15-08-2010 12:42am

Deleted User wrote: »

It has been eradicated through extensive vaccination programmes.

Thats what I have been led to believe too

sorry I am rearranging the tin foil on my head

15-08-2010 12:44am

sligopark wrote: »

Thats would I have been led to believe too

Have you really been as far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

sligopark · 15-08-2010 12:47am

Deleted User wrote: »

Have you really been as far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

wtf?

ancapailldorcha · 15-08-2010 1:05am

Variola major (the virus that causes smallpox) is possibly the most deadly pathogen mankind has ever encountered. It is estimated to have killed over 500 million people and has a death rate of 30% making it an ideal choice as a bioweapon. The vaccine used to prevent smallpox is based on the vaccinia (cowpox) virus which is not an entirely safe vaccine and has a death rate of about 24 per million. This is not counting the amounts of symptoms such as encephalitis (brain infections) caused. Add the fact that the WHO declared smallpox eradicated decades ago (trust them?) and that means the world is very vulnerable to a smallpox pandemic which would certainly kill many, many people.
Source

bleg · 15-08-2010 11:05am

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Variola major (the virus that causes smallpox) is possibly the most deadly pathogen mankind has ever encountered. It is estimated to have killed over 500 million people and has a death rate of 30% making it an ideal choice as a bioweapon. The vaccine used to prevent smallpox is based on the vaccinia (cowpox) virus which is not an entirely safe vaccine and has a death rate of about 24 per million. This is not counting the amounts of symptoms such as encephalitis (brain infections) caused. Add the fact that the WHO declared smallpox eradicated decades ago (trust them?) and that means the world is very vulnerable to a smallpox pandemic which would certainly kill many, many people.
Source

So many contradictions.

Are you advocating non vaccination against smallpox due to the risk associated with vaccination? Or, are you saying we should all be vaccinated because we can't trust the WHO when they say that smallpox is eradicated?

What does the article suggest in its conclusions?

What does this have to do with swine flu?

sligopark · 15-08-2010 11:32am

bleg wrote: »

What does this have to do with swine flu?

you think that this pharmaceutical industry interest has only influence on the issue of swine flu?

the word naive comes to mind

Nodin · 15-08-2010 11:37am

bleg wrote: »

So many contradictions.

Are you advocating non vaccination against smallpox due to the risk associated with vaccination? Or, are you saying we should all be vaccinated because we can't trust the WHO when they say that smallpox is eradicated?

What does the article suggest in its conclusions?

What does this have to do with swine flu?

Roughly?

'THEY'RE TAKEN OVER, MAN!!!!!!!'

or so I'd guess.

bleg · 15-08-2010 11:52am

sligopark wrote: »

you think that this pharmaceutical industry interest has only influence on the issue of swine flu?

An article in a rag claiming a third of a few advisers are linked to various pharmaceutical companies (not even the ones that stood to profit directly) is not evidence of any influence.

It's the Daily Mail for **** sake.

I still don't get the link between smallpox eradication and swine flu though. Perhaps you could elaborate.

ancapailldorcha · 15-08-2010 12:38pm

bleg wrote: »

So many contradictions.

Are you advocating non vaccination against smallpox due to the risk associated with vaccination? Or, are you saying we should all be vaccinated because we can't trust the WHO when they say that smallpox is eradicated?

What does the article suggest in its conclusions?

What does this have to do with swine flu?

No, I just thought I'd provide a little info. My point was that overall, the vaccine was greatly beneficial even though it had an imperfect safety profile. Big Pharma has been hugely beneficial to human health and just because it's committed a fair share of evils doesn't mean we should boycott western medicine which is based on evidence based healthcare.

the_barfly1 · 15-08-2010 2:26pm

I'd be of the opinion that in order to maximise profits, Pharma companies focus on the TREATMENT of illnesses rather than the cure. After all, if you cure somebody there's gonna be no reason to for them to come back with repeat business!
IMO, all these drugs just break your immune system down and make you more suceptible to contracting/suffering from even more viruses.
I used to catch every bug going, but decided to myself about 8 yrs ago that i'd stop taking ALL types of pharma drugs, I wouldnt take as much as a paracetamol for a headache.
From about 6 months after that decision right through to today, I haven't even had as much as a headache.
I'd recommend anybody else to give up the meds.

White blood cells FTW.

Pace2008 · 15-08-2010 3:19pm

the_barfly1 wrote: »

I'd be of the opinion that in order to maximise profits, Pharma companies focus on the TREATMENT of illnesses rather than the cure. After all, if you cure somebody there's gonna be no reason to for them to come back with repeat business!
IMO, all these drugs just break your immune system down and make you more suceptible to contracting/suffering from even more viruses.
I used to catch every bug going, but decided to myself about 8 yrs ago that i'd stop taking ALL types of pharma drugs, I wouldnt take as much as a paracetamol for a headache.
From about 6 months after that decision right through to today, I haven't even had as much as a headache.
I'd recommend anybody else to give up the meds.

White blood cells FTW.

Will you maintain this philosophy if you're struck down with cancer?

the_barfly1 · 15-08-2010 3:45pm

Pace2008 wrote: »

Will you maintain this philosophy if you're struck down with cancer?

Well im not completely knowledgleable on cancer treatment, but afaik it does involve cutting that **** outta you if caught early enough, which i reckon there'd be a greater possibility of if one wasnt gorging on painkillers to hide the symptoms. Either way though, i wouldn't be ok with taking a cocktail of drugs for any reason.

Pace2008 · 15-08-2010 3:48pm

the_barfly1 wrote: »

Well im not completely knowledgleable on cancer treatment, but afaik it does involve cutting that **** outta you if caught early enough, which i reckon there'd be a greater possibility of if one wasnt gorging on painkillers to hide the symptoms. Either way though, i wouldn't be ok with taking a cocktail of drugs for any reason.

So you'd forgo chemotherapy even if it was the most effective treatment, and painkillers if you were in excruciating pain?

By the way, you can't build an immunity to headaches as you seemed to suggest, as they're not caused by pathogens (bacteria, virii etc.). White blood cells have nothing to do with it.

the_barfly1 · 15-08-2010 4:07pm

Pace2008 wrote: »

So you'd forgo chemotherapy even if it was the most effective treatment, and painkillers if you were in excruciating pain?

By the way, you can't build an immunity to headaches as you seemed to suggest, as they're not caused by pathogens (bacteria, virii etc.). White blood cells have nothing to do with it.

I'm just speaking from my own experience and what works best for me, and with regards to chemo, i know damn all about it! Not something id be worrying about to be honest!

Pace2008 · 15-08-2010 4:27pm

the_barfly1 wrote: »

I'm just speaking from my own experience and what works best for me, and with regards to chemo, i know damn all about it! Not something id be worrying about to be honest!

I'm sure you'd start worrying about it fast enough if you were afflicted with cancer, which is not uncommon even in people who live healthy lifestyles.

It's all very well to "say no to drugs" until you get tuberculosis or a deep infection.

OutlawPete · 15-08-2010 4:33pm

This is all no surprise to me.

I always had a feeling Pete Townshend was on drugs.

bleg · 15-08-2010 4:38pm

Pace2008 wrote: »

I'm sure you'd start worrying about it fast enough if you were afflicted with cancer, which is not uncommon even in people who live healthy lifestyles.

It's all very well to "say no to drugs" until you get tuberculosis or a deep infection.

Or HIV!

ancapailldorcha · 15-08-2010 4:52pm

the_barfly1 wrote: »

I'd be of the opinion that in order to maximise profits, Pharma companies focus on the TREATMENT of illnesses rather than the cure. After all, if you cure somebody there's gonna be no reason to for them to come back with repeat business!
IMO, all these drugs just break your immune system down and make you more suceptible to contracting/suffering from even more viruses.
I used to catch every bug going, but decided to myself about 8 yrs ago that i'd stop taking ALL types of pharma drugs, I wouldnt take as much as a paracetamol for a headache.
From about 6 months after that decision right through to today, I haven't even had as much as a headache.
I'd recommend anybody else to give up the meds.

White blood cells FTW.

Ever heard of the placebo effect?
Medicine isn't as simple as deciding whether or not to cure something or just to alleviate the symptoms temporarily. For example, if you have a bacterial infection and you give antibiotics but not enough to kill the infection you'll probably end up with a resistant infection which will prove much more difficult to treat. Things like rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis can't be cured, all that can be done is treating with Immunosuppressants to temporarily relax the symptoms. Genetic disorders are similar in this manner. There is no curing them, just treatment to give the patient the best possible quality of life.

sligopark · 15-08-2010 6:00pm

bleg wrote: »

An article in a rag claiming a third of a few advisers are linked to various pharmaceutical companies (not even the ones that stood to profit directly) is not evidence of any influence

sure - the rags the same opinion has been raised include the BMJ, JAMA and FT - but hey you hold tight to what may be described as a naive belief system

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Genetic disorders are similar in this manner. There is no curing them, just treatment to give the patient the best possible quality of life.

huh? one word - epigenetics.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Big Pharma has been hugely beneficial to human health.

Based on what? HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA LOL LOL ROFLMAO

Pace2008 wrote: »

Will you maintain this philosophy if you're struck down with cancer?

Yes plenty of evidence past chemotherapy and this cancer scare tactic

bleg wrote: »

Or HIV!

or HIV scare tactic - Gaysus I can get HIV from eating my greens and that nasty Gerson therapy LOL

You guys sound like drug pushers

Pace2008 wrote: »

I'm sure you'd start worrying about it fast enough if you were afflicted with cancer, which is not uncommon even in people who live healthy lifestyles.

truly healthy lifestyles or the latest trends or useless advice from their GP that includes taking the latest drug pushed?

Pace2008 wrote: »

It's all very well to "say no to drugs" until you get tuberculosis or a deep infection.

How many healthy robust people do you know that fall to TB or deep infection (which I presume follows some operation for ill health and so rules out the healthy robust individuals I know)?

ancapailldorcha · 15-08-2010 6:08pm

sligopark wrote: »

huh? one word - epigenetics.

Do you even know what that word means?

sligopark wrote: »

Based on what? HAHA HAHA HAHA HAHA LOL LOL ROFLMAO

Gee, what would I be basing that on? Vaccines? Antibiotics? Antimalarials? Immunosuppressants? And ROFLMAO? What age are you? 12?

sligopark wrote: »

You guys sound like drug pushers

As I said earlier, just because pharmaceutical firms make the drugs for the sole purpose of lining their pockets doesn't mean they don't work. Granted, they like to alter results and the like but there are plenty of drugs that have saved many lives and given people with diseases like MS a much better quality of life.

Third of WHO advisers received support from drug firms

Comments