- This topic is empty.
April 18, 2020 at 16:43 #52042Paul Barbara
Mark Taylor: Columbine and Big Pharma Whistleblower, now drugged and jailed:
I don’t know Mark’s current situation, but suspect he is still forcibly inarcerated and drugged. I’ll try to find out his current situation.April 18, 2020 at 20:01 #52060Paul Barbara
Thanks; I’ve made a note of the breathing exercises. I used to do some Yoga in my early days, including breathing exercises.April 18, 2020 at 20:08 #52061Paul Barbara
‘…Exhibit E disproves the common fallacy that all the steel debris was shipped off to China before inspection…’
The vast majority of the steel was shipped off, and under strong security. One lorry-driver was sacked for having a break I believe in a transport cafe) while delivering a load of the steel.
It has been known by NIST’s own admissions that some of the steel was examined, but they just left anomalies hanging in the air about what could have caused the phenomenally hot temperatures that some of the steel had been exposed to.April 18, 2020 at 20:26 #52065Paul Barbara
‘…The evidence for WTC7 explosives remains ambiguous. The partially evaporated steel debris suggests thermite, which does not explode…’
Nanothermite is an explosive:
‘..Below are ten references to the fact that nanothermites can be made to be explosive.
1. This 2004 paper from Lawrence Livermore Labs is quite clear about nanothermites being —
“explosive composites based on thermite reactions.”
It begins: “We have developed a new method of making nanostructured energetic
materials, specifically explosives … using sol-gel chemistry.”
2. This online article entitled “NanoScale Chemistry Yields Better Explosives” discusses the procedure by which sol-gel nanothermites are made and gives a nice TEM image of a nanothermite. https://www.llnl.gov/str/RSimpson.html
3. This US Department of Defense journal from Spring, 2002 describes how:
“All of the military services and some DOE and academic laboratories have
active R&D programs aimed at exploiting the unique properties of nanomaterials
that have potential to be used in energetic formulations for advanced explosives.”
It clarifies that —
[Nanothermite properties] “include energy output that is 2x that of high explosives”
and “As sol-gel materials and methodology advances, there are a number
of possible application areas that are envisioned [including] high-power, high-energy
4. A high explosive creates a shockwave that always travels at high, supersonic velocity from the point of origin. This paper describes how —
“the reaction of the low density nanothermite composite leads to a fast propagating combustion, generating shock waves with Mach numbers up to 3.”
5. In this paper, former NIST employee Michael Zachariah discusses —
“developing an oxidizer matrix for reaction with nano-aluminum [i.e. nanothermite] for energy intensive applications involving explosives and propellants…”.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/cm034740t ….’ (Etc.)
‘…– “I was sixteen years old when my father was killed in the North Tower. In the past year, I’ve come to learn much more about his murder”…’
It is sad that A&E9/11Truth get people’s hopes up like this, because demolition of WTC7 is not in itself evidence for pre-rigged demolition of the Twin Towers…’
Many of the victims (health problems) and relatives of victims are desperately keen for the truth to come out – it is not sad at all when they learn new information.
You’re right that proof of demolition of WTC 7 would prove demolition of the Towers, but it would prove the PTB are lying, and makes the demolition of the Towers as well more plausible, particularly with the 118 First Responders’ reports of explosions, and the unreacted nanothermite and iron spherules in the dust.April 18, 2020 at 20:59 #52067Paul Barbara
If you believe you have a valid argument, against Rousseau’s thesis, then why don’t you write in to A&E with it?
After all, that is listed under ‘Request for Correction’. Or write to André Rousseau.April 18, 2020 at 22:02 #52071Paul Barbara
You might find this interesting, re CT’s!
‘Jesse Ventura | Talks at Google’: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pS1edpeGqI&t=9sApril 18, 2020 at 23:50 #52074Clark
Paul, I’ve picked up so many pieces of the puzzle over the years that I now think I have an overall picture of what happened. Most of it matches what you would call the official story, and that makes sense to me because tens, probably hundreds of thousands of people were involved in the many various investigations and court cases, and those people needed to be satisfied that they’d found all the clues. The investigations broadly needed to match reality; it has the be that the devil is in the detail.
So here’s what I think and why. 9/11 was all about convergence of interests. US neocons, NATO, Israel, the Gulf Monarchies, the arms and petrochemical industries – 9/11 was to the advantage of all of these, and all contributed.
A major part was a Gladio B operation by NATO secret services, and the point of it was to draw all the NATO countries into ongoing conflict. The first major action after 9/11, the invasion of Afghanistan, couldn’t have been a NATO operation without 9/11 – there’s a video somewhere about this, but I’ve no idea how I’d find it again, but there was one all important document to be obtained, an order, without which the US couldn’t have got NATO – the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation – into Afghanistan. Afghanistan is, after all, nearly as far as you can get from the North Atlantic without actually going off-planet. 9/11 secured that NATO order.
We know that there’s a Gladio B operation, and that it uses jihadis instead of the fascists of the original Gladio, and that it’s run by NATO secret services. We know all this from Sibel Edmunds.
Osama bin Laden and his colleagues were a secondary target. Osama was an enemy of the Saudi power structure, one of the very few Wahhabis who remained true to his faith, brutal though it is. From a rich family, I think he got to see first hand the boozing, fornicating and drug taking of the Saudi royals, and he found it hypocritical. So he turned against them, and developed a warrior creed in Afghanistan, dedicated to evicting the US from his Holy Land among other things. As such, his organisation was a threat to the al Sauds. 9/11 was blamed on Osama’s organisation both as a cover story and so it could be smashed. Some of Osama’s men, probably an entire cell, probably contributed, not realising they were being tricked. Unwittingly, they were being run by Gladio B.
The torture policy, signed in by Condoleezza Rice and implemented by the CIA, was to produce false confessions and permanently corrupt the testimonial evidence. With so many false confessions the CIA could implicate any Muslim organisation it chose, but more importantly, these false stories could be used to deflect attention away from the Muslim jihadis that the CIA routinely exploits, so that they could carry on doing so, in Benghazi and Syria for instance.
The Mossad’s role was to infiltrate jihadi groups with dual-language Semitic Jews. This is Bollyn’s good work, but it’s all from the 80s and he has no access to top neocon power structures, so he has nothing directly relevant to 9/11. But the principle and his historical investigations are sound; Semitic Jews are Middle Easterners and can pose as Arabs, but their loyalty is to Israel. They acted as handlers and spies, probably in the US too. Another Israeli contribution was to open holes through airport security.
The events of the actual day were almost straight down the official story line. This is the safe way, the way it’s almost impossible to get caught; the clever stuff is all in the background, all set up in advance with nothing to do on the day. NATO insiders had set the timing, knowing when USAF would be otherwise engaged, and when NORAD would be doing a drill with dozens of false “inserts” on their radar screens. Genuine jihadis boarded genuine passenger aircraft and genuinely hijacked them and flew them into buildings. No demolition or explosives were needed; no incriminating evidence if something went wrong. Jihadis could be disowned. The last little bit was that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld were “unavailable”, “too busy with ongoing events” to give intercept and shoot-down orders. They didn’t have to do anything but fail, and then only a tiny bit.
But who were these pilots who could fly so well? Well the US routinely trained Saudi military pilots under the 1945 Quincy agreement. Perfectly routine; it had been going on for half a decade. Nothing to be alarmed about, the Saudis are US allies… So how to cover that up? Easy. Only four of the nineteen were pilots; the rest were there to control the flight crew and passengers. So have four of the non-pilots train at civilian flight schools and let the investigators think they’d discovered the pilots. Though they almost blew that one with Hani Hanjour’s incompetence.
What about muddying the water? Well, who first suggested a missile at the Pentagon? Er, Rumsfeld, no less. And who first suggested that the Twin Towers were incredibly strong and explosives must have been used? Oh, the Real Donald Trump indeed, advocate of torture and friend of Silverstein; Trump went on air and said both of those things that very afternoon.
I know that the Twin Towers would collapse if structural failure occurred; I did those sums myself. Could they be sure of structural failure to initiate collapse? Well there’s that Ukrainian I found on HistoryCommons, climbing the North Tower as everyone else was going down, with a stuffed rabbit full of explosives; don’t tell me NATO weren’t embedded in Ukraine. He was celebrating the collapse and fire of the South Tower, and he was delivered to security but taken off by Men in Black and never heard of again. And how many more like him?
And WTC7? Basically luck; a godsend for the cover-up. After a massive lump of WTC1 fell on it, the rescue authorities needed it demolished before it fell over and proliferated fire, so a team was assembled and a fast demolition was done; isn’t there a SEAL team stationed in New York naval base? Secrecy was ordered on pain of being prosecuted for premeditated murder by asbestosis. No one involved has said a word since, enabling WTC7 to spawn a raft of demolition theories that have led almost the entire Truth Movement down the garden path for years.
This seems to me a coherent story. It is consistent with the testimony of major whistleblowers; Coleen Rowley and a host of others, who say that investigations that would have revealed the hijackers were quashed from on high. Sibel Edmonds with her Gladio B testimony, whose Sunday Times series was cancelled at the insistence of the CIA. Michael Springmann, who said the State Department repeatedly ordered him to issue US visas to very dubious Saudis. Susan Lindauer, who says that Richard Fuisz of the CIA knew roughly when and where in advance, but not what.
So there you go; that’s my guess.April 19, 2020 at 09:11 #52090Paul Barbara
Talking about Seal Teams, you should watch the Jesse Ventura link above – he’d make a great President.
My take on 9/11 is it was planned in conjunction with a Middle East regime (not Saudi Arabia, though certain Saudis were probably told about it).
The ‘Saudi Hijackers’ business was a ‘red herring’ from the outset, no hijackers were on any of the planes allegedly used. OBL had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11.
The video footage we saw of ‘Boeings’ hitting the Towers were faked; I don’t know if any aircraft hit the towers, but if so they were drones with no passengers and not the’planes’ shown in the fake TV footage (I am fully aware that even in the 9/11 Truth Movement, this idea is largely anathema).
No plane hit the Pentagon (nor did a missile), but a drone was shot down over the Pentagon lawn near the helipad.
Barry Jennings was murdered, as his testimony conflicted with the NIST WTC 7 Final Report.
Danny Jowenko was murdered, ‘Boston Braked’, because he was seen as a credible demolition expert whose testimony could cause trouble for the PTB and their ‘Official Narrative’.
Many very important eye-witnesses, whom William Rodriguez assembled, were not allowed to testify to the Commission, and William Rodriguez’ own extremely important testimony was held behind locked doors, and no mention of it was included in the Commission Report.
The Twin Towers were brought down with explosives (including nanothermite/nanothermate), as was WTC 7.
We know where we differ, and neither of us is likely to change our beliefs without a very substantial breakthrough, but I for one will continue to put up articles I believe help get to the truth.
And I believe that this Covid – 19 is another ‘False Flag’ event, blaming China, to be used to massively increase government control and to strike at Civil and Human Rights (including, probably, a mandated vaxx program – or limiting people’s natural rights if they don’t accept it).April 19, 2020 at 11:51 #52100Clark
You’re taking the most sensationalist option at almost every step.
You should beware, Paul. Humanism, non-duality, rationality, and their practical application, science, are the modern ideologies and practices of dedication to truth, honesty, and dedication to reality, so of course those who advance the evil of winning at the expense of others, those who effectively worship Mammon, take every opportunity to chip away at them. If a claim contradicts the scientific consensus, be very, very wary about propagating it. Such claims need to be thrashed out in the scientific literature, where the most knowledgable congregate.
I’m worried that we might never get a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes covid-19. It’s a coronavirus as are some of the common cold viruses, and vaccines against coronaviruses have never been successful. It isn’t even clear yet whether suffering and recovering from covid-19 imparts immunity. If it doesn’t, no vaccine may be possible, because there’s no immunity to prime with a vaccine. That’s why there’s no HIV vaccine after all these decades; there are no former sufferers, people whose immune system has defeated the virus, so there’s no target for a vaccine to reach for.
Those who blame China are blaming the victims.April 19, 2020 at 17:54 #52124Clark
I tend towards anarchism, Paul. I think we’d all be better off without leaders everyone should take responsibility, like in the Quakers everyone’s a minister to everyone else.
As for Ventura, he knows that demolitions can be rigged in hours because he’s done it; he was in the U.S. Navy Underwater Demolition Team during the Vietnam War:April 19, 2020 at 18:29 #52125Clark
26 minutes into Jesse Ventura and he’s opened discussion for questions from the audience. Good points; I like what he’s said so far, criticism of “two party dictatorship”, his books sound interesting, and I wholeheartedly support his advocacy for openness, and criticism of official secrecy. Mild criticism; he’s obviously taking the opportunity to promote his books, but hey, who wouldn’t?April 19, 2020 at 20:56 #52131Paul Barbara
I’ll correct that slightly – I’m not sure if a missile was used, but I believe explosives were used, either alone or in conjunction with a missile/drone.April 20, 2020 at 09:57 #52162Clark
Paul, how should we know things?
I mean, by what method should we determine what is true, and what is false? Is the self enough?April 21, 2020 at 02:47 #52246Clark
Paul, apparently William Rodriguez testimony to the 9/11 Commission was made public in 2008:April 21, 2020 at 03:13 #52249Paul Barbara
I can only speak for myself. I use my previous experiences, reading etc. to judge the likelihood of what is true. I may on occasion be wrong, but when (if) later proof comes up, I was generally right. I started campaigning practically 50 years ago, so I can safely say I know how evil our leaders are, and their Puppetmasters (even though I may well not know who precisely these Puppetmasters are).
Re a previous comment:
‘..If a claim contradicts the scientific consensus, be very, very wary about propagating it. Such claims need to be thrashed out in the scientific literature, where the most knowledgable congregate…’
Unfortunately money controls the ‘Scientific Consensus’ these days; scientists, doctors, lecturers, universities overwhelmingly succumb to the lure of the filthy lucre.
Others are murdered. For a long time I had a Red Top, I think the Mirror, where the front page had 50-odd doctors and/or scientists who had died in mysterious circumstances or admittedly been murdered. Not long ago, I threw the lot away, as I had a stack of newspaper cuttings going back decades, which I thought I’m never going to sort out, and use, and if there is something I want to refer to I can always find it on the internet. I reckoned without the increasing logarithms and pruning of contentious articles, and was unable to find the ’50-odd dead doctors’ article, but I did find this:
‘The Mystery Of The Dead Scientists’: https://rense.com/general39/death.htm
That is another way the PTB adjust the ‘scientific consensus’ in their favour.April 21, 2020 at 03:25 #52250Paul Barbara
Here’s another article, and it is not the one the Mirror (or whichever paper it was that I was looking for the article from) was covering – they were different doctors/scientists.
‘Mysterious Holistic Doctor Deaths Are On The Rise’:
You know, of course, that the PTB are not keen on Holistic Doctors.
And what do you make of this, from the 2012 London Olympics?
‘C- vid 9teen h-oa-x ritual with predictive programming at olympics 2012 ORIGINAL’:
Forget the end of the video – that is where the presenter adds his own religious views, but otherwise, like so many times before, the PTB telegraph their intended nefarious plans, often years in advance (they did the same on many occasions with 9/11).April 21, 2020 at 09:10 #52252Clark
– “..when (if) later proof comes up, I was generally right”
Would you give me some examples please? Preferably including some you got wrong too, because negative results are important results too.
How did you get on with Bad Science ?April 22, 2020 at 02:48 #52293Paul Barbara
I got to page 216 (over half way through) but then got on with other things – I was not impressed, and of course agreed with some of it. I accept I’m a bit of a sucker for supplements, which I realise may not be of any benefit, but I still take them.
Zinc Lozenges are a good bet for the virus, and flu-like virus; here is a good source:
Exactly the same products from the same firm are on sale for much more on Amazon and Ebay.
An obvious time I was right was with the Syrian ‘CW’ attacks/hoaxes. From the outset I was sure they were False Flag ops by the Western mercenary Headchoppers and their Western-supplied PR outfit the ‘White Helmets’. The OPCW leaks have proved this to be the case.
I can’t think offhand where I have been wrong, but I know I have been on occasion.April 22, 2020 at 04:05 #52295Paul Barbara
@ Clark April 21, 2020 at 02:47
I didn’t know William Rodriguez’ testimony was published. But serious issues arise – they read differently to his testimony, which I have heard in person from him a number of times, about how the first explosion came from below him (and he was in Basement B1), then the second came some 7 seconds later from above.
As you can see from link below, parts of his testimony are still restricted.
I heard him tell his story at least two, and more likely three or four times. I have a picture of myself giving him a book (‘Operation Cyanide’, what else?).
I totally believe his story, that he was feted by the government and media, was offered his own TV show, and encouraged to become a politician, and got a medal from Bush, but that they dropped him like a hot potato when he insisted on there being explosions in the North Tower.
He said he had two hundred friends who died in the collapse (he had been working in the Tower almost twenty years).April 22, 2020 at 11:57 #52298Clark
Here are two interviews William Rodriguez gave on the day. In both he said he was in the basement. In one, the first thing he describes is an explosion; in the other it’s a “big rumble”. In both, the first victim he describes has severe burn injuries rather than blast injuries, so the explosion was probably the fuel fireball down the lift shafts rather than explosives:
CBS via NIST – ‘Explosion’
CNN direct – ‘Big rumble’
Rodriguez also described the fireball in other accounts. On the first anniversary of 9/11 (2002) he gave this interview:
– On the subject of your friends, one of them is with you, a relatively new friend I know, William Rodriguez. If Mr. Rodriguez is actually close enough, we’ve got a mike on him, just tell the story of how — William, tell the story of how the two of you met.
– UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, no, we knew each other for many years. We work at the — I work at the building. I personally in charge of all the stairs, of all the maintenance of the stairs in the building. And I knew David for probably 15, 16 years.
– And at that terrible day when I took people out of the office, one of them totally burned because he was standing in front of the freight elevator and the ball of fire came down the duct of the elevator itself, I put him on the ambulance. And I came back running into the building. And the only person that I found there was Officer David Lim. And the first thing that he told me was, Willie, do you have the key. Meaning if I had the master key to the building, which I have and I still have. It’s over here. This is the key that opened all the doors on the staircase. It’s called a T2 key. And he said let’s go.”
But a few years after 9/11 I think a lawyer latched onto him and started promoting him for publicity, and Rodriguez’ story changed slightly to the explosion happening before the aircraft impact, which Rodriguez couldn’t have had any knowledge of, being in the basement at the time.
Rodriguez testimony to NIST was given in public. His restricted testimony to the 9/11 Commission might be about his claim to have seen one of the alleged hijackers:
I think this probably is what’s restricted because the real identities of the hijackers is a major government no-go area, because they were Saudi military pilots trained by the US I strongly suspect. Jihadi headchopper pilots. Headchopping is compulsory public family entertainment in Saudi Arabia.April 22, 2020 at 12:14 #52299Clark
– “..I was right was with the Syrian ‘CW’ attacks/hoaxes.
There’s masses of propaganda around wars and foreign policy. It does get exposed, eg. Craig, but the corporate media basically never cover the exposures.
– “I can’t think offhand where I have been wrong, but I know I have been on occasion”
It’s important to keep a tally so you know which subjects you’re getting right or wrong. The corporate media’s science coverage is worse than dreadful. If you have the same edition of Bad Science as I have and you’re on page 216, you’re right in the middle of How the Media Promote the Public Misunderstanding of Science. You haven’t got to the bit about how Blair and the media concocted the “MMR causes autism” story. No, I’m not kidding; that’s an MSM hoax! Not content with promoting pills, the media undermine even our tools of understanding, and they don’t care how many they kill.April 22, 2020 at 12:30 #52300Clark
Regarding supplement pills, they’re only needed when diet is deficient. Us in the West have good access to good food, and taking pills really isn’t natural. If these companies really cared they’d be giving away their pills where there’s malnutrition; instead they just sell them to westerners.April 22, 2020 at 12:34 #52301Clark
We can naturally get everything we need in our diet; that’s obvious whether you accept creation (God put what we need in food) or evolution (we’re adapted to the food that’s available). Pills haven’t been around very long. Very small things for what they cost though, and a factory is needed to make them.April 24, 2020 at 02:18 #52409Paul Barbara
I have a condition where I need to take strong medication to curb stomach acid, which means food doesnt digest as it should, so I lose nutrition from food I eat; also, though I do try to eat healthily, I certainly don’t get a balanced diet. So the supplements will continue, though they are expensive and of questionable efficacy.
Re William Rodriguez, I was very surprised and taken aback when I saw him talking about a ‘rumble’ in your link – every time I heard him he spoke of a ‘boom’, an explosion that pushed him and the others in the room up, as it came from below.
I will have to do some revision and checking before I reply to your points, but it will take some time as it is not a priority with so much else going on at the moment.
(I tried to post this yesterday morning, but must have forgotten to push ‘submit’ or something as it wasn’t here, instead there was a note in red saying ‘are you sure you meant to do that’ or something; maybe I pressed a wrong key somehow).April 24, 2020 at 09:46 #52425Clark
Yes, if you have a medical problem, supplements can be needed. But a decent government would include them with your prescription, of course.
– “instead there was a note in red saying ‘are you sure you meant to do that’”
The site software underwent a routine update a few days ago, probably since you last posted on the forums. The new version of the forum software seems to forget the username (it’s a bug), and you have to fill it in again or you get a message in red. It’s happened to me repeatedly, because it’s partly done from cookies and I have my browser set to clear them.April 24, 2020 at 09:48 #52426Clark
And they wouldn’t charge for the bloody prescriptions either.April 24, 2020 at 09:53 #52427Clark
– “every time I heard him he spoke of a ‘boom’, an explosion that pushed him and the others in the room up, as it came from below.”
Yes, he started saying that a few years later. It is just from my memory, but I think some lawyer cottoned onto him, and then Rodriguez’ testimony changed slightly; power of suggestion perhaps?April 25, 2020 at 16:12 #52510Paul Barbara
I think it was Thatcher who said ‘Prescription Charges wont go up’. I believe they were ten pence each at that time and when she was in office, they rose to I believe £2.
I don’t know what they are now, as I don’t pay for prescriptions, but they are certainly high enough for many people to choose not to get them filled.
And of course Big Pharma (and pharmacies if they are not included in that term) rip the NHS off rotten.April 25, 2020 at 16:16 #52511Paul Barbara
Clark, I don’t know if that infernal glitch that puts a ‘+’ in the middle of people’s names irritates you as it does me, but could you have a word with the Mods or Craig asking them to put some notices on posts so people know how they can get rid of the ‘+’? I know it is easy, but people seem unaware of how to correct it.April 25, 2020 at 16:23 #52512SA
The current prescription charge is £9.15 per item. That’s quite a lot for some. But there are exemptions of course. They probably still represent a relatively small proportions of the total drug cost in many cases.
Big pharma can be viewed as a necessary evil. Of course they profiteer. But there are two sides to big pharma, the corporate side which has to make big money by any means, and the scientific side which in many cases is essential to modern medicine. These giant corporations also have large overheads and the developmental cost of drugs can be very high and sometimes an investment in a certain drug can lead to large losses when the drugs are not found to be effective or have side effects. But of course we need them especially when they will be able to scale up the vaccine we are all waiting for, for SARS cov2, which I am sure you will be first in the queue for.April 25, 2020 at 19:11 #52518Paul Barbara
@ SA April 25, 2020 at 16:23
There is no case for profiteering in medicine or in medical and hospital care (or incarceration) (unless you are a shareholder or part of the industry). Profiteering means people lose their lives because medication is unaffordable; it also means tiny alterations to medications allow these corporations to extend patents on drugs losing their patent protection, thus extending their overpricing.
And it means profits come before patients lives and health and safety.
Look at vaccines, where the corporations cannot be sued, so have far less reason to ensure the safety of vaccines, all arranged by Big Pharma’s mob of lobbyists and bribers, and corrupt politicians.
Medicine should be Nationalised, in all it’s functions. The vast sums of taxpayers’ money governments pay to these corporations could be used instead to fund public facilities, which would attract the scientists presently employed by the corporations.
I think you are British, so you should know how privatisation has been an expensive flop in Britain, with prices rising, plus bailouts and subsidies to the lucky profiteers, sometimes foreign based.
Privatisation is just a snazzy way of transferring more wealth from the many to the few. Massive infrastructure, built up by decades of taxpayers money, sold off for a fraction of it’s worth to the Capitalist cronies of the politicians, with the inevitable bungs.
By all means have private TV makers, TV’s are not a life-saving product, but meds often are.
Why you defend these crooks beats me.
‘..SARS cov2, which I am sure you will be first in the queue for…’
Wanna bet? They can stick their vaccines where the sun don’t shine.April 25, 2020 at 19:26 #52519Paul Barbara
Actually, I wrongly stated Thatcher said she would not increase prescription charges; what she said was she had no intention of putting them up (but a few weeks later did just that).April 25, 2020 at 21:15 #52521Clark
SA, 16:23 #52512 – ” there are two sides to big pharma, the corporate side which has to make big money by any means, and the scientific side which in many cases is essential to modern medicine.”
SA, have you read Goldacre’s second book, Bad Pharma?
Intellectually, it is simply terrifying. We literally do not know what many of the drugs do! I’m not exaggerating, especially about newer drugs.
It is questionable to what extent the research of the pharmaceutical companies can be called “science”. It’s definitely research, but an essential aspect of science is that it be open to scrutiny. Goldacre goes through scores, if not hundreds of ways that Big, Bad Pharma hide the results of their research, releasing only those parts that show their products in a good light. The word ‘occult’ simply means ‘hidden’, and much if not most drug development and testing would be better described as occult rather than science.
Non-Disclosure Agreements figure prominently in this. The scientists work under conditions of what I call meta-secrecy, in that the non-disclosure agreements in their contracts forbid them revealing the non-disclosure agreement itself. This should be a crime, it is damaging to the scientists’ mental health. Compare with employees under the UK Official Secrets Act; if interviewed and asked a question to which the answer is restricted, they can at least say “I’m sorry, I can’t answer that as I am bound by the Official Secrets Act”. Not so for the hapless scientists working under most NDAs; they have to obfuscate and fudge to avoid revealing the NDA itself. This is an intolerable strain for anyone; they are effectively forced to anticipate problematic questions such that they never stray towards it being asked in the first place.
Then there is the complicity of the industry regulators; in all of the US, UK and EU, the “revolving door” between industry and regulators leads to industry capture of the regulators, and the rules favour the industry in the first place.
Then we have unethical practices, such as tiny subsidiary companies scattered all across the Third World testing experimental drugs on impoverished people because there are hardly any regulations or enforcement there.
A whole 400+ pages of it; I could go on and on. It truly is a horror show.April 25, 2020 at 21:24 #52522Clark
Paul Barbara, 19:11 #52518 – “Look at vaccines, where the corporations cannot be sued, so have far less reason to ensure the safety of vaccines,”
That’s not what’s going on there Paul. The government mandate the vaccine programme, so it’s the government that’s liable for vaccine injury compensation payouts in the vaccine court. If a vaccine batch is contaminated or not up to specification, the government compensates the parents, and the vaccine manufacturers have to compensate the government.
That’s all as it should be, but there are a load of lawyers and legal companies who’d make a great deal more money if parents had to sue the vaccine manufacturers directly on a case-by-case basis. These are the money behind the anti-vax propaganda in the US, and why the anti-vax arguments come predominantly from the US right-wing.April 25, 2020 at 21:34 #52523Clark
Vaccine development for SARS-CoV-2 is looking very challenging. The problem is that the antibodies that the body naturally produces against SARS-CoV-2 have a pretty high chance of triggering worse effects in the body than the virus itself does. Those are your own, natural antibodies; they can kill you by triggering cytokine storm. It seems that SARS-CoV-2 is a bloody clever virus.
The problem for vaccine development is that vaccines work by inducing the immune system to produce antibodies against the virus, but if such antibodies can kill you anyway, then the vaccine could too.April 25, 2020 at 21:36 #52524Clark
But if a decent vaccine is eventually developed, I’d much rather have the vaccine than CoVID-19.April 25, 2020 at 21:41 #52525Clark
Regarding my 21:24 comment #52522, I’m not saying there’s no corruption; I’m sure there’s as much skulduggery as surrounds the rest of the pharmaceutical industry. But it’s important to get the big picture right before trying to fix things; no use firing your weaponry at decoys.April 26, 2020 at 00:30 #52532Clark
Ben Goldacre, 2013:
– So, to be clear, this whole book is about meticulously defending every assertion in the paragraph that follows.
– Drugs are tested by the people who manufacture them, in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analysed using techniques which are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments. Unsurprisingly, these trials tend to produce results that tend to favour the manufacturer. When trials throw up results that the companies don’t like, they are perfectly entitled to withhold them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see a distorted picture of any drug’s true effects. Regulators see most of the trial data, but only from early on in a drug’s life, and even then they don’t give this data to doctors or patients, or even to other parts of government. This distorted evidence is then communicated and applied in a distorted fashion. In their forty years of practice after leaving medical school, doctors hear about what works through ad hoc oral traditions, from sales reps, colleagues or journals. But those colleagues can be in the pay of drug companies – often undisclosed – and the journals are too. And so are the patient groups. And finally, academic papers, which everyone thinks of as objective, are often covertly planned and written by people who work directly for the companies, without disclosure. Sometimes whole academic journals are even owned outright by one drug company. Aside from all this, for several of the most important and enduring problems in medicine, we have no idea what the best treatment is, because it’s not in anyone’s financial interest to conduct any trials at all. These are ongoing problems, and although people have claimed to fix many of them, for the most part they have failed; so all these problems persist, but worse than ever, because now people can pretend that everything is fine after all.April 26, 2020 at 02:39 #52535SA
I have read bad pharma. But I have also personal experience of the sharp practices. Two drugs that have been used for many years and had been available generically for tens of years, thalidomide and hydroxyurea were found to have other uses years after they had been invented and used. The developmental work for the new uses, in multiple myeloma for thalidomide, and hydroxycarbamide for sickle cell anaemia were Done by many outside pharma but then appropriated by pharmaceutical companies and licensed for them to use for these indications On rather tenuous grounds. It’s a long story but this device enabled the companies to be able to charge 6 times the price of generically available drugs on the basis that their products were licensed and generic ones were not. The nhs then was forced to use the expensive drugs. I don’t know that this has ever been openly discussed.
But for both of Clark and Paul, I stated that pharma profiteers, not as condoning big pharma, just stating that this is a fact of life according to the system we live in, corporate capitalism. In fact this was the original definition of fascism, but nowadays the term is more likely to be used to mean right wing totalitarianism.April 26, 2020 at 10:20 #52556Paul Barbara
‘..Those are your own, natural antibodies; they can kill you by triggering cytokine storm. It seems that SARS-CoV-2 is a bloody clever virus..’
Have you considered that there may have been some ‘bloody clever’ scientists somewhere who created it, and that it was spread deliberately?
Del Bigtree said the same about the cytokine storm. Here he exposes ‘Open Mike’ incident:
‘THE REAL HOAX: REPORTER CAUGHT ON TAPE’ Del Bigtree (Just search – I haven’t got round to learning how to post url’s the way you told me, and I just got ticked off by the mods on the vaxx site for putting the full url in).