Research shows pharmaceutical side effects exceed adverse warnings 5X

by Paul Fassa
See all articles by this author


(NaturalNews) Often no matter how bad you think it is, the reality is worse than imagined. This is the case with pharmaceutical side effects. It's so bad that even mainstream medical research acknowledges there are more adverse side effects than disclosed.

But their viewpoint still holds pharmaceuticals as the only medicine that works. Nutrition hardly affects health, if at all. Herbs are plants from which labs duplicate active ingredients for synthetic drugs that are the only effective medicines. Homeopathy doesn't work, etc. That's the medical monopoly mindset.

A slight crack has appeared in their medical arrogance. Researchers from Stanford Medical School created a couple of data bases that prove there are up to five times more adverse effects from pharmaceuticals than displayed or publicized.

Their research

The Stanford study was reported in the March 14th, 2012 edition of Science Translational Medicine by lead author Russ Altman, MD, PhD and his graduate student assistant Nicholas Tatonetti.

They created a dual data base system to analyze data from the FDA's adverse event reporting system (AERS). Their premise that safety trials are conducted on the public after a drug hits the market is noteworthy (Stanford report, source below).

They also mentioned that clinical trials for obtaining FDA approval are insufficient for assuming safety for everyone within all situations. However, their viewpoint is still locked into that medical monopoly mindset mentioned earlier.

The Stanford research is an attempt to provide more knowledge for better prescription advice to minimize side effects. But there is no concession to any other modality of medical treatment. In other words, they want to clean up their act a bit, not fold up their snake oil wagons to move on and let others show their wares.

Even cleaning up their act is unlikely

The Journal of American Medicine (JAMA) reported in 1998 that the fourth highest cause of death was properly prescribed pharmaceuticals. Adding those deaths by improperly prescribed drugs puts the death ranking from Big Pharma "medicine" to third place.

These statistics don't include over the counter drugs. Instead of confronting these statistics, the FDA and AMA engage in marginalizing and suppressing other healing modalities that are safe and effective.

Dr. Ray Strand, author of Death by Prescription explained to Mike Adams in a 2005 interview that the FDA should demand adverse effect reports from medical professionals, the way it's done in Europe and the UK, and clinical trials should be funded by the government (http://www.naturalnews.com/009758.html).

Currently, reporting to AERS is voluntary in the USA. Many experts estimate that only five to ten percent of actual adverse effects do get reported. Funding for trials is provided by pharmaceutical companies who pay the FDA for their approval. The very foundation of this system is corrupt.

Oh yes, don't forget that the USA and New Zealand are the only nations that permit direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Also consider how Big Pharma starts wooing and training MDs while they're still in med school.

So, the Stanford study, while laudable considering it's from within the medical monopoly system, is based on AERS data that contains a fraction of actual adverse effects. The study also doesn't address the FDA's financial angles and conflicts of interest with Big Pharma shills slipping through the government/corporate revolving door.

Nice try guys. It would be better to simply apply anti-trust laws to the medical monopoly, if there are still any anti-trust laws in the books. Allow "alternative" (real) medicine to come to the forefront while your field gets the "quack" flack it deserves.

Sources for this article include:

Stanford report http://med.stanford.edu/ism/2012/march/offsides.html

http://www.sott.net

http://www.alternet.org

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.survivingcipro.com/