Deep State

Does electing a particular President, or a Prime Minister really change anything? Apart from a few cosmetic alterations, does an Obama or a Cameron really change the lives of the population who democratically put him into office? (writes Chuck Cable)

The sad truth is, hardly at all. These elected leaders are little more than puppets. Welcome to Deep State.

But please don’t be fooled here – Deep State is not the inertia caused by non-changing departments and under-bureaucracy ever present in the descending tiers of Government or Civil Service.

Deep State is the control – increasingly, total control – of the state by vested interest. Only recently, President Putin of Russia talked of the resurgence of the ‘Illuminati’ and how he was determined to take them on. Do you think he is a complete crank? He is currently talking about revealing a report by Russian medical experts on the failings and corruption in the vaccine industry. He says Russia wants no part of the America vaccine corruption mechanism near it. He’s certainly right on that argument!

Deep state is the term given to the influence and control by certain parties over democratically elected government. Vested interest is all-powerful.

Everybody must surely be aware nowadays that it takes money to get elected. For example, ‘Big Sugar’ is run by the Fanuji brothers. One supports the Republicans, the other the Democrats. They’re not stupid. And Clinton in flagrante delicto with Monica L, apparently took just one phone call – that’s the power of Big Sugar.

Can you even get elected without a courtesy call to Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook? Or millions in donations from Big Pharma, Apple, Microsoft, Merck and the occasional oil baron? New pipeline across America? No, problem.

Is it any surprise that they expect something in return? Can you even go to war without money from the Big Banks (all under Jewish influence)? And now in California – they want child vaccinations under the control of the State, not the parent. Yes, I know there is a vote, and I know Oregon threw the law out, but the very fact that a bunch of non-elected bureaucrats think they are more competent to decide than the parent, says it all.

Did I say bureaucrats? In Europe elected MEPs passed a law (a resolution actually) to ban over 1000 chemicals of concern from everyday products you use in your home today. Result? A Euro Commissioner (un-elected) said the decision needed rethinking and appointed an unelected committee to look a it. Were lobbying and vested interests involved? Is the Pope Catholic?

In America the Committee at the CDC who approve vaccines, and key personnel at the FDA who approve drugs, seem almost interchangeable with people openly working for Big Pharma. How independent is that? And if a drug or a vaccine is approved in the USA today, how long before it is approved in the UK or Europe, without any real questions asked?

So here we are. A pound of flesh and the rest. Welcome to Deep State – the new Illuminati.

Drugs and vaccinations are given immunity from public claims for causing harm. American companies shift money around the world and avoid local taxes. Big food continues to serve up trans fat, sugar-rich junk; Wiki-leaks shows us the US Government was prepared to threaten and blackmail France if they stood up to GMO; Why, you can even attack Iraq illegally alongside George Bush and when you retire land a plum job in charge of Palestinian Peace, earning a fortune for failure their too.

As always, innocent people are suckered in. For example, every Skeptic arguing against ‘alternative therapies’ is just a Deep State troll in conflict with the fundamental Orwellian prophecies in the book they read and quoted at University. Just when they thought they were standing up for ‘liberty, freedom of speech and true democracy’ – even true science – it turns out they are just Darth Vader clones, making ever more money for the Mr Bigs, and dumping their children in ever deeper shit.

How ironic that Apple’s launch advertising back in the eighties was “1984 will not be like 1984’.

Oh yeah?

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

CRISPR takes American Medicine to a dangerous level

While European Governments and companies have held back, the Americans race ahead developing CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeat).

What does it do? Well it is James Bond meets Mission Impossible and then some. Having cracked the layout of the Human Genome, this system would enable scientists to see what bit had gone wrong in a sick person, and then change it.

At the moment, the scientists are beavering away, taking cells out of sick people, trying to change the relevant gene sequence and then put the cells back. Who needs chemotherapy drugs?

But the real breakthrough would come if the changes could be made in situ, without any cells being taken from the body. If you had cancer or diabetes, you could just be zapped, and health would return in days.

Of course, the technology could be used more widely. For example, defects at birth could be altered, allowing a long and happy life.

But what about students? Could their genome be altered to make them brighter?

Or prisoners – could their genome merely be altered to stop them robbing or murdering.

Or militant Muslims, what of them?

In America, CRISPR is in the public eye now and dubbed the Microsoft Word of genetics.

, , , , , , ,

Big Pharma providing ‘Useless and sometimes harmful drugs’

The Queen’s former doctor, also former-president of the Royal College of Physicians Sir Richard Thompson is part of a group of six eminent doctors warning about the negative influence of pharmaceutical companies in the public health arena. The group has called for an urgent and independent public enquiry into drugs firms’ ‘murky’ practices by Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee.

One of the group’s other experts, NHS cardiologist Dr Aseem Malhotra, two years ago (along with 11 other cardiologists), told the UK Prime Minister to adopt the colourful Mediterranean Diet as a way of ‘preventing all the chronic illnesses that beset the Western World’, instead of ‘popping pills’. Then, one of the targets was statins.

The new group claims that too often patients are given useless and sometimes harmful drugs that they simply do not need. They claim public funding is often allocated to medical research because it is likely to be profitable, not because it will be beneficial for patients.

Crucially, whilst they accuse the NHS of failing to stand up to Big Pharma, they argue that the latter are developing medicines they can profit from, rather than those, which are likely to be the most beneficial to patients.

But the strongest words were left to last. Thompson and his colleagues accuse the NHS of ‘over-treating’ its patients, arguing that the side-effects of too much Big Pharma medicine is leading to countless deaths’.

Examples of the over-claims and money wasting include half a billion pounds on Tamiflu that was neither needed nor worked, and statins, where the original clinical trial data has never ever been published.

Only recently statins have been shown to double the risk of diabetes.

, , , , , , , , , ,

Aspirin and cancer trial doomed to failure?

Hailing it as the “world’s largest clinical trial to investigate whether taking aspirin every day stops the recurrence of some of the most common cancers”, the NHS and Cancer Research UK are taking more than 11,000 patients from 100 centres across the UK.

The study will run for 12 years and involves different groups taking different doses of aspirin

Somewhat bizarrely, the dosages will be 100 and/or 300 mgs.

What is odd about this is that the original discovery of the aspirin effect, John Vane (who won a Nobel Prize and a Knighthood for his efforts, showed clearly that the dose need be no more than 75 mgs. This research was confirmed by the Mayo clinic who felt the benefit came from a small dose (81 mgs).

Further large studies from Oxford University and The Radcliffe Hospital, and from the Francis Crick Institute in London have confirmed that aspirin can reduce inflammation throughout the body (a precursor to cancer), can greatly reduce cancer spread and increase survival times, and can even prevent the cancer from hiding from the immune system.

Prof Ruth Langley, the chief investigator at the Medical Research Council’s clinical trials unit at University College London, said: “There has been some interesting research suggesting that aspirin could delay or stop early-stage cancers coming back, but there has been no randomised trial to give clear proof. This trial aims to answer this question once and for all.

“If we find that aspirin does stop these cancers returning, it could change future treatment – providing a cheap and simple way to help stop cancer coming back and helping more people survive.

“But, unless you are on the trial, it’s important not to start taking aspirin until we have the full results, as aspirin isn’t suitable for everyone, and it can have serious side-effects.”

And this is a real problem. CANCERactive has consistently informed of the increasing research on the benefits of aspirin, but in the small dose size. Even then we have known patients develop serious side-effects like stomach ulcers.

We are extremely concerned that patients taking the higher 300 mgs dose especially will show a greatly increased risk of stomach ulcers, with the whole trial having to be curtailed.

We predict high levels of side-effects and publicity saying aspirin is dangerous, when at the smaller dosage it has already-proven significant benefits.

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Whooping Cough Vaccine doesn’t work

In 2013, in Tallahasee, Florida twenty six kids between the ages of 1 and 5 developed whooping cough. So did two staff and 11 parents. According to a CDC report, almost all had been vaccinated

The fact that younger kids developed the disease more readily was blamed on ‘waning immunity’, although there was also a view that the virus was mutating.

Following a similar outbreak in 2014 in Elk Grove, California officials expressed the view that the vaccine just doesn’t work anymore. At best it may need repeating every 3-5 years.

At this point logic goes out of the window as Authorities try to lay the blame on ‘unvaccinated’ children.

However, in Vermont in 2012, 90 per cent of the kids getting the disease were vaccinated, which raises the possibility that the problem is the other way round. What if the vaccine were giving kids the disease?

, , , , ,

Lies and fraud in MMR and Autism links

Following a whistleblower’s activities in exposing the trashing and thus omission of hard evidence linking autism in African-American children to the MMR vaccine, exposure is now being demanded by Rep. Posey in the US Senate.

His entire statement on the CDC destroying evidence, is printed here:

I rise today on matters of scientific integrity and research. To begin with, I am absolutely, resolutely, pro-vaccine. Advancements in medical immunization have saved countless and greatly benefitted public health. That being said, it’s troubling to me that in a recent Senate hearing on childhood vaccinations, it was never mentioned that our government has paid out over $3 billion through a vaccine injury compensation program for children who have been injured by vaccinations.

Regardless of the subject matter, parents making decisions about their children’s health deserve to have the best information available to them. They should be able to count on federal agencies to tell them the truth. For these reasons, I bring the following matter to the House floor.

In August 2014, Dr. William Thompson, a senior scientist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, worked with a whistleblower attorney to provide my office with documents related to a 2004 CDC study that examined the possibility of a relationship between [the] mumps, measles, rubella vaccine and autism. In a statement released in August, 2014, Dr. Thompson stated, ‘I regret that my co-authors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics.’

Mr. Speaker, I respectfully request the following excepts from the statement written by Dr. Thompson be entered into the record.

[Now quoting Dr. Thompson.]

‘My primary job duties while working in the immunization safety branch from 2000 to 2006, were to later co-lead three major vaccine safety studies. The MADDSP, MMR autism cases control study was being carried out in response to the Wakefield-Lancet study that suggested an association between the MMR vaccine and an autism-like health outcome. There were several major concerns among scientists and consumer advocates outside the CDC in the fall of 2000, regarding the execution of the Verstraeten Study. One of the important goals that was determined up front, in the spring of 2001, before any of these studies started, was to have all three protocols vetted outside the CDC prior to the start of the analyses so consumer advocates could not claim that we were presenting analyses that suited our own goals and biases. We hypothesized that if we found statistically significant effects at either 18 or 36 month thresholds, we would conclude that vaccinating children early with MMR vaccine could lead to autism-like characteristics or features. We all met and finalized the study protocol and analysis plan. The goal was to not deviate from the analysis plan to avoid the debacle that occurred with the Verstraeten thimerosal study published in Pediatrics in 2003.

‘At the Sept 5th meeting we discussed in detail how to code race for both the sample and the birth certificate sample. At the bottom of table 7, it also shows that for the non-birth certificate sample, the adjusted race effect statistical significance was huge.

‘All the authors and I met and decided sometime between August and September 2002, not to report any race effects from the paper. Sometime soon after the meeting, we decided to exclude reporting any race effects. The co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room, and reviewed and went through all the hardcopy documents that we had thought we should discard, and put them into a huge garbage can. However, because I assumed it was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hardcopies of all documents in my office, and I retain all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper.’

Mr. Speaker, I believe it is our duty to insure that the documents that Dr. Thompson are not ignored. Therefore I will provide them to members of Congress and the House Committees upon request. Considering the nature of the whistleblower’s documents as well as the involvement of the CDC, a hearing and a thorough investigation is warranted.

So I ask, Mr. Speaker, I beg, I implore my colleagues on the appropriations committees to please, please take such action.

Source: https://sharylattkisson.com/cdc-scientist-we-scheduled-meeting-to-destroy-vaccine-autism-study-documents/
http://www.naturalnews.com/050599_CDC_scientists_scientific_fraud_vaccines_and_autism.html#ixzz3hVlsqvcp

, , , , , , , , ,

“All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to remain silent”

Apparently, patients are losing trust in doctors and scientists.

Dame Sally Davies, the UK’s Chief Medical Officer has decided to make the research behind medical treatments ‘much more transparent’ amid concerns that the public increasingly believe that doctors and medical scientists are “untrustworthy”. The reasons, she claimed, were that doctors over –medicate and prescribe medicines too freely, while scientists are distrusted because of Big Pharma funding.

A BBC ‘File on Four’ documentary on Alteplase, which breaks down blood clots seems to have prompted her action. According to The Times, stroke ‘expert’, Alistair Buchan has said that researchers should publish every figure behind their claims about whether or not a new drug is useful.

But, this move to transparency may not be quite what you or I really hope for. Buchan goes on to talk about negative comments in the media “putting stroke treatment back to where we started”.

Let’s get a few things straight. Peter C. Gotzsche, head of the prestigious Nordic Cochrane Centre has published a book entitled, “Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma has Corrupted Healthcare”. In February there was a report from the FDA stating that at least 40 per cent of clinical trials were flawed, and recently Dr. Richard Horton, Editor-in-chief of the top rated medical journal, The Lancet, stated that much of the published research data on drugs is unreliable and at least half is false. “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”

Gotszche notes that prescription drugs are the third largest cause of death in the Western world after heart disease and cancer.

Patients are right to have concerns.

The smart public knows this – we know that Big Pharma has spent years bribing and falsifying. Fraud seems second nature to some companies. In the last couple of years Glaxo has been hit with massive fines from America to China.

The added problem is that the hierarchy in medicine has made the doctor complicit, whether he is an ‘expert’ oncologist or a local GP.

Doctors – it’s your own fault patients don’t trust you any more. ‘All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to remain silent”.

Yes, we are concerned that you over-medicate. Polypharmacy (dishing out a cocktail of drugs to patients) is the number one cause of death in the state of Florida where the average age is higher than most other places. Thirteen drugs per patient is not uncommon. When did you ever see a clinical trial featuring thirteen drugs?!

But the bigger issue is the dismissive nature of many doctors. Offered statins by his doctor, a friend of mine asked about the side-effects. “There aren’t any” came the reply. “Well what about heart and muscle problems”. “They aren’t problems – we have tests for those”.

The doctor didn’t even consider talking about increased risks of diabetes.

I listen to patients offered Taxol and told there is nothing to worry about when they ask about side-effects. Yet German research presented at the European Breast Cancer Symposium a few years ago expressed real concerns on it causing cancer spread.

Meanwhile the same doctors tell patients not to take supplements, when there is no research on conflict. It’s not just that some doctors are corrupted by Big Pharma bribery. Their advice is a mess.

So, what is the answer? Unfortunately, Dame Sally is looking at ‘a proliferation of contradictory claims in the press and scientific journals’. There’s a possible next step.

Stop the media reporting that drugs might be dodgy. Then scientists and doctors will become trustworthy again. Brilliant!

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Dr Byers, supplements and increased cancer risk – Same turgid old stuff.

It seems every five years or so, someone is appointed to jump up and warn us all about Vitamin Supplements and their dangers.

This time Dr Byers got the short straw.

The problem is that we’ve heard it all before, the same research, the same generalisations – and we know the answer.

Out comes the same one-off research study (following an indicative study) on beta-carotene and smoking. Then there is research on vitamin E which has little benefit and may even do harm.

Neither supplement would I touch anyway. Both mass market supplements in the main are deficient, synthetic copies of the real thing. In nature beta-carotene is available in cis- and trans- forms, but only one is used in the common supplement. Vitamin E is worse. Most studies involve synthetic alpha-tocopherol, just one of the eight variants found in nature. In my book it should not even be called vitamin E (it’s fraud).

Synthetic vitamins, for me, carry the same basic risks as synthetic drugs. Natural vitamin E is easy to come by. Put out a bowl of nuts and seeds – a handful of sunflower and pumpkin seeds will give you the four tocotrienol vitamin Es – shown to be much better than tocopherol in fighting cancer anyway.

Folate supplementation is, quite possibly, a threat to all these highly profitable cholesterol-lowering statin drugs, which are under soooo much pressure at the moment from leading heart specialists. They have been linked to a range of secondary illnesses from diabetes to eye sight problems; and research is now questioning whether they do lower death rates from heart attacks and strokes.

Folate, again, is a vitamin you should get from your diet – eat your greens!!!! If you are short you are in trouble. If you have a healthy microbiome (gut bacteria) and eat properly you will be fine; too much you might be in trouble. It has an RDA in ‘micrograms’ for that reason.

But what I love is the way the ‘research’ extrapolates a study on synthetic beta-carotene and smoking to warn the listeners on supplements in general. It would be like me saying that since one drug, Vioxx, killed 48,000 Americans and is now banned, people should be careful when using any drugs because their benefits are questionable and there is clear evidence of significant risks.

Mass market vitamin supplements have limited benefits, although Centrum produced a study a couple of years back showing their multivitamin reduced cancer risk by 7 per cent – this would extrapolate to 22,000 less people with cancer in the UK alone next year. In 2003, the French produced the Su Vi Max study which had followed 17,000 people on selenium and zinc, vitamins E and C and beta-carotene – that showed 31% fewer male cancers (but little change for women); and 37% less deaths overall from cancer over the study period.

I am much more interested in bioactive natural compounds such as vitamin D, curcumin, fish oils, sulforaphanes, CLA, MCP and another 60 with Epigenetic benefits. Now they are interesting. Even Dr Young S. Kim of the NCI in her research on foods that could stop cancer stem cells re-growing, said these could be taken as quality supplements.

Ok. It’s diary time. Which doctor, or preferably professor wants to author this same study on the risks of supplements in 2020?

I’ll have this Junk Science article ready to re-run then too.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FDA counters Skeptic claims on Homeopathy

It is now time to be completely confused about homeopathy.

Having been bored to tears by the skeptic propaganda on homeopathy (It doesn’t work; Ineffective treatments; false hope; just sugar solution; no active ingredient because it is so diluted etc. etc. yawn), and while the Australian Government were saying it was ineffective, we’ve seen the Swiss Government give it the thumbs up, it seems Big Pharma may be trying a different tack to stop a growing threat to its business.

The FDA has now announced that homeopathy is so effective it could be dangerous and so must be regulated. On 19th March the FDA published a safety alert on Asthma Homeopathic medications (http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm439014.htm)

And it is URGENT – a meeting in three weeks (anytime now) and a decision!

Part of the argument is that companies produced and sold homeopathic remedies and that was OK when there were just a few homeopaths in America. But now there are many, it is getting out of control and lots of people are being prescribed these dangerous treatments. No, seriously. See http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/ComplianceManuals/CompliancePolicyGuidanceManual/ucm074360.htm

How could the skeptics get it so wrong?

, , , , , ,

ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE

I was asked recently what I thought of ‘alternative medicine’. I replied as I have consistently done for a number of years, ‘There is no such thing as alternative medicine. A treatment either works or it doesn’t’.

If you talk to cancer patients and ask them what they want a treatment to do, it is simply to cure them.
Here I side with Dr. Henry Friedman of the Preston Robert Tisch Cancer Center at Duke University Medical Center, Carolina. He said, on the front page of the website, ‘I believe cancer can be cured; it may be in remission but it can be in remission permanently’. Brave words from a man who treats people with gliomas, which are often described as ‘terminal’.

So his aim is to get a patient into remission and, ideally, even cure them.

Talk to patients. Their aim is to be cured. It’s as simple as that. ‘Manage your cancer with drugs for the rest of your life, madam?’ ‘No thanks, I’d rather be cured.’

This fits with the way things are going for cancer patients too. In a 2012 report, the American Cancer Society concluded that since 2006 there had been an explosion in research into complementary therapies and that there was ‘overwhelming evidence’ that certain of them like diet and exercise could increase survival and even prevent a cancer returning.

Sounds like a result to me. And obviously to patients at large.

Which leads me to the fact that there is a humungous problem with cancer drugs. They don’t cure cancer. In 2012 it was proven beyond any reasonable doubt, that at the heart of all cancers lay cancer stem cells. An ‘inconvenient truth’ is that while drugs can cause a decrease in tumour size of 50, 60 or even 70%, as of today there is not one single drug known to man that kills off the cancer stem cells at the heart of the tumour.

But despite this, 54 per cent of people do beat cancer (or at least survive 5 years – which, I agree, is not really the same).

Cue Dr. Young S. Kim of the National Cancer Institute in America who concluded from her research in 2012, that people who employed a poor diet saw their cancers return. While people who employed a good diet – including foods that were high in sulphoraphanes, curcumin, piperine, EGCG, choline, genistein, vitamin A and E, and a couple of others – could prevent the cancer returning. She even went so far as to say that these bioactive compounds could be obtained via quality supplements.

The fact is, that very few patients nowadays rely on their oncologist’s medicines to cure a cancer. They may use them, but they employ a range of their own treatments from fasting, juice diets, colourful Mediterranean diets, yoga, IVC, weight control, even (perish the thought) localized hyperthermia, HIFU and the dreaded apricot kernels. Several women I know have used a herbal poultice called Black Salve. Oncologists treating the ladies both said the same thing.: Having confirmed that the ‘thing’ in the jar was indeed a tumour, they said they had never seen anything like it. But it was beyond their training and they could comment no more.

Of course not all these treatments have been through ‘The rigours of a clinical trial’. Actually, ‘rigourous trial’ when it comes to drugs is a bit of an oxymoron. Even the FDA has just concluded that almost 40% of drug clinical trials were sloppy and inaccurate. Worse, Peter Grotzsche, the head of the highly respected Nordic Cochrane Centre, has a book called ‘Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma has Corrupted Healthcare’. The title says it all. And it is the British Medical Association’s 2014 book of the year!!

Radiotherapy and surgery have hardly a clinical trial between them. Surgery, even biopsies, have been linked to increased metastatic activity. Cutting out a colorectal cancer is certainly no guarantee that the cancer won’t return in your lungs or liver.

Brachytherapy, used for prostate cancer is now used in some parts of America for up to 60% of breast cancers, meriting huge protests. Why? Errr, there are no clinical trials to support it. The new sexy Cyberknife will cause less damage – who says? Show me the proof. Does it prevent a cancer returning?

Meanwhile Hospitals feed the cancer with ice cream, sweet desserts and milky, sugary tea. The drink and snack food dispensers all offer chocolate bars, and cans of fizzy soft drinks full of High Fructose Corn Syrup. Leading cancer charities say there is no harm in feeding cancer patients cows’ dairy and sugar. They are out of their tiny minds. 2014 research showed sugar CAUSED cancer. 2013 research showed people with the highest blood sugar levels survived least.

And so it goes on.

A subplot over the last few years included research from Johns Hopkins that showed chemo drugs actually caused a cancer to return – and stronger; German research that showed Taxol caused metastases 6 months after treatment was finished and Scientists from Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts Amherst showed in research published in January 2015 that some chemotherapy drugs actually caused cancer stem cells to re-grow. Another ‘inconvenient truth’?

So, there are treatments that have the power to prevent a cancer returning. And there are others that don’t. Some may even make matters worse.

The ones that do keep cancers at bay – diet, exercise, quality supplements and a few others, are thus treatments that work. The others – chemo, radio and surgery are but unproven alternatives supported by dodgy research, vested interest, mafia-like unions, some paid skeptics and often simple fraud.

Patients are right to think of self-empowerment. Offering chemical potions that simply don’t give them what they want – preventing a cancer from returning – that’s just unproven alternative medicine.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,