Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

[Master Shake]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

Ditto!

Another note: the cyclical, reinforcing marketing of the drugs, where regular dosages change the brain in a way that will strengthen the original symptoms when treatment ends, usually resulting in increased maintenance dosages.

Hasn't this become a hallmark of many of our commodities across the board? Something touted to relieve symptoms, from a stuffed up nose to fleas on your dog, gives a masked temporary relief but actually exaccerbates the condition.

What's wrong with relieving symptoms?

[DSpencer]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

Ditto!

Another note: the cyclical, reinforcing marketing of the drugs, where regular dosages change the brain in a way that will strengthen the original symptoms when treatment ends, usually resulting in increased maintenance dosages.

Hasn't this become a hallmark of many of our commodities across the board? Something touted to relieve symptoms, from a stuffed up nose to fleas on your dog, gives a masked temporary relief but actually exaccerbates the condition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fever#Fever_phobia

The human body raises body temperature to help fight off illness. Many people's reaction is to take fever reducing medication at every opportunity. It makes them feel better and like they are doing "something" even though it may prolong the illness. There are situations where reducing fever is clearly beneficial, but those are less common.

Economic policy seems similar in my view, but with lots of additional mischief added and the fact that other people's constant interventions affect more than themselves. Maybe more similar to everyone's desire to take antibiotics for every imaginable ailment.

There are however lots of areas where the stakes are high, the options are confusing and I don't have a firm opinion on what the best answer is. Lots of health choices seem to fall in this area. I tend to take the natural route most of the time, but if things got serious I would certainly seek mainstream medicine. Lots of mainstream fixes are the easy way out for people who aren't willing to do anything else.

[DSpencer]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

What's wrong with relieving symptoms?

In some cases, nothing. In cases where it causes the root problem to worsen eventually reaching a point where the symptoms are not able to be relieved, lots. Or where the side effects create worse problems.

[don]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

Master Shake: What's wrong with relieving symptoms?

It is well understood that psychoactive drugs disturb neurotransmitter function, even if that was not the cause of the illness in the first place. Whitaker describes a chain of effects. When, for example, an SSRI antidepressant like Celexa increases serotonin levels in synapses, it stimulates compensatory changes through a process called negative feedback. In response to the high levels of serotonin, the neurons that secrete it (presynaptic neurons) release less of it, and the postsynaptic neurons become desensitized to it. In effect, the brain is trying to nullify the drug’s effects. The same is true for drugs that block neurotransmitters, except in reverse. For example, most antipsychotic drugs block dopamine, but the presynaptic neurons compensate by releasing more of it, and the postsynaptic neurons take it up more avidly. (This explanation is necessarily oversimplified, since many psychoactive drugs affect more than one of the many neurotransmitters.)

With long-term use of psychoactive drugs, the result is, in the words of Steve Hyman, a former director of the NIMH and until recently provost of Harvard University, “substantial and long-lasting alterations in neural function.” As quoted by Whitaker, the brain, Hyman wrote, begins to function in a manner “qualitatively as well as quantitatively different from the normal state.” After several weeks on psychoactive drugs, the brain’s compensatory efforts begin to fail, and side effects emerge that reflect the mechanism of action of the drugs. For example, the SSRIs may cause episodes of mania, because of the excess of serotonin. Antipsychotics cause side effects that resemble Parkinson’s disease, because of the depletion of dopamine (which is also depleted in Parkinson’s disease). As side effects emerge, they are often treated by other drugs, and many patients end up on a cocktail of psychoactive drugs prescribed for a cocktail of diagnoses. The episodes of mania caused by antidepressants may lead to a new diagnosis of “bipolar disorder” and treatment with a “mood stabilizer,” such as Depokote (an anticonvulsant) plus one of the newer antipsychotic drugs. And so on.

Some patients take as many as six psychoactive drugs daily. One well- respected researcher, Nancy Andreasen, and her colleagues published evidence that the use of antipsychotic drugs is associated with shrinkage of the brain, and that the effect is directly related to the dose and duration of treatment. As Andreasen explained to The New York Times, “The prefrontal cortex doesn’t get the input it needs and is being shut down by drugs. That reduces the psychotic symptoms. It also causes the prefrontal cortex to slowly atrophy.”^*

Getting off the drugs is exceedingly difficult, according to Whitaker, because when they are withdrawn the compensatory mechanisms are left unopposed. When Celexa is withdrawn, serotonin levels fall precipitously because the presynaptic neurons are not releasing normal amounts and the postsynaptic neurons no longer have enough receptors for it. Similarly, when an antipsychotic is withdrawn, dopamine levels may skyrocket. The symptoms produced by withdrawing psychoactive drugs are often confused with relapses of the original disorder, which can lead psychiatrists to resume drug treatment, perhaps at higher doses.

To some, quite a bit.

[Master Shake]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

To some, quite a bit.

You had mentioned nasal decongestion. When I have a cold, I would rather treat that symptom and be able to function better and get a good night's sleep rather than just let the virus run its course with no relief from the symptoms. I'm not sure what the issue is with the other example you gave, flea control for pets.

As far as anti-depressants go, I was on them for a couple years in my early 20's (norpramine/desimpramine). They worked for me and didn't create any withdrawal/dependency issues.

And now back to your regularly scheduled diatribe against Big Pharma.

[Master Shake]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

In some cases, nothing. In cases where it causes the root problem to worsen eventually reaching a point where the symptoms are not able to be relieved, lots. Or where the side effects create worse problems.

This is definitely an issue where it pays to be an educated consumer. Educated, not paranoid and ready to embrace conspiracy theories and junk science.

[Guinnesstime]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

Here is a non-quack book about cancer for the misinformed.

http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Cancer.../dp/0815340788

[Ghent12]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

My resistance is entirely a function of his profit seeking.

When a guy says outrageous things and then offers to sell you the alternative, Shields Up!

Profit-seeking is a problem for you? Then you lose credibility in the realm of economics because everyone who offers goods or services seeks a profit except the most avowed Communists living in actual Communist markets where they don't need to worry about profits or losses--that or the US Postal Service, etc.

"Outrageous" things are in the eye of the beholder. Apparently, from what I read in shiny!'s post, there are at least kernels of truth in what he is saying, and perhaps more. His seeking profits (and necessarily needing to avoid losses) will, if unmolested, eventually prove or disprove his claims with or without any "establishment" credentials.

I continue to be amazed that "profit" is a dirty word, especially on an economics site.

[DSpencer]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

Profit-seeking is a problem for you? Then you lose credibility in the realm of economics because everyone who offers goods or services seeks a profit except the most avowed Communists living in actual Communist markets where they don't need to worry about profits or losses--that or the US Postal Service, etc.

I understand where c1ue is coming from on this issue in that he is not an unbiased source of information on topics where he seeks to profit from selling the "cure". That being said, I usually feel the opposite reaction. When someone tells me they're not looking to make a profit, I tend to get suspicious and question their motivation.

Profit seeking is obviously present in mainstream medicine. I also had to laugh earlier where someone mentioned suspicion about his willingness to offer opinions on so many unrelated topics. Apparently they have never talked to many doctors (or people in general), never spent time on the internet and certainly haven't read many itulip threads. Please note: I'm joking.

His seeking profits (and necessarily needing to avoid losses) will, if unmolested, eventually prove or disprove his claims with or without any "establishment" credentials.

I'm not sure that's true in this case. This situation might be considered an example of a credence good where it's difficult to know the "quality" or in this case truth/effectiveness of what he's selling, even after buying it.

He may be wrong on everything and still have a successful career selling supplements or whatever as long as he can convince enough people he's right. I do believe in the power of the free market to tend towards weeding out inferior products/services, but it doesn't happen immediately and in all cases. Time is an important factor, especially for areas like health.

Personally I agree with some of his viewpoints but some of it seems like "quackery". I don't have the time or inclination to thoroughly educate myself on all these topics though.

[c1ue]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

Profit-seeking is a problem for you? Then you lose credibility in the realm of economics because everyone who offers goods or services seeks a profit except the most avowed Communists living in actual Communist markets where they don't need to worry about profits or losses--that or the US Postal Service, etc.

"Outrageous" things are in the eye of the beholder. Apparently, from what I read in shiny!'s post, there are at least kernels of truth in what he is saying, and perhaps more. His seeking profits (and necessarily needing to avoid losses) will, if unmolested, eventually prove or disprove his claims with or without any "establishment" credentials.

I continue to be amazed that "profit" is a dirty word, especially on an economics site.

You must buy a lot of stuff from infomercials then.

As I've noted before - it strains the limits of reality that any one man can truly have the experience and knowledge to be an expert in so many different fields.

On the other hand an entertainer, a politician or similar types of collectors of dissent can make a powerful living preying on the ignorance and fear of others.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

You must buy a lot of stuff from infomercials then.

As I've noted before - it strains the limits of reality that any one man can truly have the experience and knowledge to be an expert in so many different fields.

On the other hand an entertainer, a politician or similar types of collectors of dissent can make a powerful living preying on the ignorance and fear of others.

But he does not claim to have such an all consuming knowledge. My view of reading his web pages and watching the videos, is that he works very hard to present details of many others work, very often citing wide ranging research.

He makes it very clear that he has dedicated his working life to presenting information that will help us live better, more successful lives. Yes, he sells, but the majority of what he sells is a better quality of something that we can buy from many different outlets. Everything from ceramic cooking vessels, to Krill oil. Personally, I cannot afford to even think about buying the products he sells, but I do take his advice, particularly on what to eat and how to improve my life through regular exercise.

As for the "market" well, he has millions of people all over the planet reading his materials every day. Very much like EJ with iTulip - No?

Ultimately, just like EJ, he has found an excellent "Free" business model in that he provides a lot of useful free advice and those that wish to, without any pressure, are free to buy various products or not as they wish.

But I want to turn back to my original starting point. I asked; is this the greatest crime every committed?

The reaction has been illuminating, to say the least. Now I realise that my reaction was based upon what I saw in the underlying details that perhaps some others have not, so I want to return to my original thinking; what "sparked" me off, so to speak?

I am an inventor. I have had first hand experience of being an original thinker in a world dominated by large corporate companies and their associated supporting government agencies. So I could see very clear parallels with not only my own experience, but of many other individual inventors, some of which, like me, have had very negative experiences of trying to move forward within the US. My own experience has not been as extreme as noted in the cited article. I have not been threatened with jail, or with multiple attempts to place me in jail. But the record shows that the US government agencies are not inclined to help the individual inventor. So, for a start, I do believe the doctor was telling the truth and the experiences being described were valid and truthful. Add to that it would appear he has a wide ranging group that has formed around him to help him in his ongoing quest for the truth. Such people do not step forward, (particularly over such a long period of time), for no good reason. Add again the fact that a movie has been made, with all the attendant development of the story.

Then why? Why go to so much trouble to keep trying to jail the man? Why? The story smacks of the kind of thing going on in the House Un-American Activities Committee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_C...can_Activities

Now let us turn to the matter of; if he is correct, and his treatment of cancer has no side effects and can reduce the death rate by 20% and that this stems from the 1970's; then we are talking about roughly 380 US citizens per 100,000 die of cancer, roughly 1,000,000 per annum as things stand and that would mean that roughly 6,000,000 US citizens would be still alive over the 30 years or so since his discovery.

So we are talking about the deaths of 6,000,000 people that otherwise would not have happened before their normal time was up. That they died through neglect, and, if this report is proven correct, then it is surely criminal neglect.

Add the cancer research funding of $5 billion per annum, over 30 years and we are talking about the misappropriation of some very large sums of money indeed. Yes, some of that funding will still be quantifiable as rightfully targeted at the cancers he had not at that time discovered a treatment.

Ergo, if, in the end, the report is shown to be correct then I believe that anyone that knew of these actions is culpable and should be brought to justice.

You surely simply cannot sweep six million early deaths and the potential misappropriation of billions of research funding under the carpet. So I keep to my original thought, that this may very well turn out to be by far and away the greatest crime ever. In which case, it will cast a deep shadow over the United States for many generations.

[c1ue]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

I would say that anyone saying there is one simple solution for the vast field of study called cancer shows precisely the hallmark of a charlatan.

The one thing which is very clear from the vastly different rates of various types of cancer, whether by age, race, economic status, culture, diet, etc etc, it is that cancer arises from a myriad set of causes.

As for comparing EJ and Mercola, I would very much doubt Mercola presents his conclusions with the same methodological rigor. EJ and iTulip are not wedded to any particular ideology; I would look not at what Mercola disagrees with, but rather in what he agrees with.

Unlike economics, medicine has a long and well documented empirical set of data to draw from. If Mercola does nothing but disagree, that too is not a good sign.

As I pointed out both with vaccination and with chloramphenicol, medicine is not a field of ideal solutions. Unless a clear overall detriment is demonstrable, merely pointing out examples of non-ideal outcomes is worthless.

For that matter, saying X million died due to not doing some method doesn't help; the replacement could do worse only via a different path.

For example, what is the right choice: a solution which cures 20% but kills the rest in 6 months vs a solution which cures 10% but lets 70% live for 2 years?

Most things in this world are not win/lose or black/white - especially from an individual's viewpoint.

The fight/fright reaction is an excellent example. Those who fight always lose overall vs. those who flee. But the genes/Memes for fight must procreate or else the fight reaction is lost - thus the role of alpha male / lead bull arises.

[Ghent12]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

You must buy a lot of stuff from infomercials then.

As I've noted before - it strains the limits of reality that any one man can truly have the experience and knowledge to be an expert in so many different fields.

On the other hand an entertainer, a politician or similar types of collectors of dissent can make a powerful living preying on the ignorance and fear of others.

Actually I have never bought anything from an infomercial. If you don't believe him then that's your deal and you are of course welcome to state why. However, don't be surprised if people actually benefit from a seemingly incredible source.

[Chris Coles]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

But he does not claim to have such an all consuming knowledge. My view of reading his web pages and watching the videos, is that he works very hard to present details of many others work, very often citing wide ranging research.

He makes it very clear that he has dedicated his working life to presenting information that will help us live better, more successful lives. Yes, he sells, but the majority of what he sells is a better quality of something that we can buy from many different outlets. Everything from ceramic cooking vessels, to Krill oil. Personally, I cannot afford to even think about buying the products he sells, but I do take his advice, particularly on what to eat and how to improve my life through regular exercise.

As for the "market" well, he has millions of people all over the planet reading his materials every day. Very much like EJ with iTulip - No?

Ultimately, just like EJ, he has found an excellent "Free" business model in that he provides a lot of useful free advice and those that wish to, without any pressure, are free to buy various products or not as they wish.

But I want to turn back to my original starting point. I asked; is this the greatest crime every committed?

The reaction has been illuminating, to say the least. Now I realise that my reaction was based upon what I saw in the underlying details that perhaps some others have not, so I want to return to my original thinking; what "sparked" me off, so to speak?

I am an inventor. I have had first hand experience of being an original thinker in a world dominated by large corporate companies and their associated supporting government agencies. So I could see very clear parallels with not only my own experience, but of many other individual inventors, some of which, like me, have had very negative experiences of trying to move forward within the US. My own experience has not been as extreme as noted in the cited article. I have not been threatened with jail, or with multiple attempts to place me in jail. But the record shows that the US government agencies are not inclined to help the individual inventor. So, for a start, I do believe the doctor was telling the truth and the experiences being described were valid and truthful. Add to that it would appear he has a wide ranging group that has formed around him to help him in his ongoing quest for the truth. Such people do not step forward, (particularly over such a long period of time), for no good reason. Add again the fact that a movie has been made, with all the attendant development of the story.

Then why? Why go to so much trouble to keep trying to jail the man? Why? The story smacks of the kind of thing going on in the House Un-American Activities Committee http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_C...can_Activities

Now let us turn to the matter of; if he is correct, and his treatment of cancer has no side effects and can reduce the death rate by 20% and that this stems from the 1970's; then we are talking about roughly 380 US citizens per 100,000 die of cancer, roughly 1,000,000 per annum as things stand and that would mean that roughly 6,000,000 US citizens would be still alive over the 30 years or so since his discovery.

So we are talking about the deaths of 6,000,000 people that otherwise would not have happened before their normal time was up. That they died through neglect, and, if this report is proven correct, then it is surely criminal neglect.

Add the cancer research funding of $5 billion per annum, over 30 years and we are talking about the misappropriation of some very large sums of money indeed. Yes, some of that funding will still be quantifiable as rightfully targeted at the cancers he had not at that time discovered a treatment.

Ergo, if, in the end, the report is shown to be correct then I believe that anyone that knew of these actions is culpable and should be brought to justice.

You surely simply cannot sweep six million early deaths and the potential misappropriation of billions of research funding under the carpet. So I keep to my original thought, that this may very well turn out to be by far and away the greatest crime ever. In which case, it will cast a deep shadow over the United States for many generations.

While it remains true that my reaction to the original report left me deeply distressed and angry, it is also true that, upon reflection, some references I made to historical events as an emphasis of the gravity of the numbers of potential victims involved, might have been seen as offensive to others and I have now removed them.

I apologise for any offence given which was not intended.

No one has approached me to make this apology, it is entirely a matter on my own reflection upon my own actions.

[dlew22]

Re: Is this the greatest crime ever committed?

Naturopathic loonies see more conspiracies than the Truther and Birther crowds.

Treat cancer with baking soda because there is fungi inside cancer cells? LMAO.

Not sure why you're not able to see the cons on both sides of the coin? Personally the research Ej does has inspired me to look into other areas of my life with the same vigor. Ej easily illustrates the con/fraud/special interests of the economics that effect our lives, and it is revealed to me more and more that this is the case with most established sectors, Medical included.

this paper is interesting regarding baking soda

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19276390