News about the medical industry - URGENT PLEASE READ

[Aaron]

Medical Errors - A Leading Cause of Death

Medical Errors - A Leading Cause of Death
The JOURNAL of the AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (JAMA)
Vol 284, No 4, July 26th 2000
article written by Dr Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, shows that medical errors may be the third leading cause of death in the United States.

The report apparently shows there are 2,000 deaths/year from unnecessary surgery; 7000 deaths/year from medication errors in hospitals; 20,000 deaths/year from other errors in hospitals; 80,000 deaths/year from infections in hospitals; 106,000 deaths/year from non-error, adverse effects of medications - these total up to 225,000 deaths per year in the US from iatrogenic causes which ranks these deaths as the # 3 killer. Iatrogenic is a term used when a patient dies as a direct result of treatments by a physician, whether it is from misdiagnosis of the ailment or from adverse drug reactions used to treat the illness. (drug reactions are the most common cause).
The National Academies website published an article titled "Preventing Death and Injury From Medical Errors Requires Dramatic, System-Wide Changes." which you can read online at http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309068371?OpenDocument or the book "To Err Is Human: Building a Safer Health System" atTo Err Is Human: - These show medical errors as a leading cause of death.
Based on the findings of one major study, medical errors kill some 44,000 people in U.S. hospitals each year. Another study puts the number much higher, at 98,000. Even using the lower estimate, more people die from medical mistakes each year than from highway accidents, breast cancer, or AIDS. And deaths from medication errors that take place both in and out of hospitals are aid to be more than 7,000 annually.

[Aaron]

Prescription Drugs - Leading Killer in USA

Prescription Drugs - Leading Killer in USA

According to information we have received, a statistical study of hospital deaths in the U.S. conducted at the University of Toronto revealed that pharmaceutical drugs kill more people every year than are killed in traffic accidents.

The study is said to show that more than two million American hospitalized patients suffered a serious adverse drug reaction (ADR) within the 12-month period of the study and, of these, over 100,000 died as a result. The researchers found that over 75 per cent of these ADRs were dose-dependent, which suggests they were due to the inherent toxicity of the drugs rather than to allergic reactions.

The data did not include fatal reactions caused by accidental overdoses or errors in administration of the drugs. If these had been included, it is estimated that another 100,000 deaths would be added to the total every year.

The researchers concluded that ADRs are now the fourth leading cause of death in the United States after heart disease, cancer, and stroke.

Source: Jason, et al. (Lazarou et al), Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Vol. 279. April 15, 1998, pp. 1200-05. Also Bates, David W., Drugs and Adverse Drug Reactions: How Worried Should We Be? JAMA, Vol. 279. April 15, 1998, pp. 1216-17.

One of the first JAMA article on medical errors appeared in JAMA 1994;272:1851-7. by Leape LL. Then in April 1998, JAMA 1998 Apr 15;279(15):1200-5 See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-po...=r&uid=9555760

Related articles are at JAMA -- File Not Found

Other related articles:
Schuster M, McGlynn E, Brook R. How good is the quality of health care in the United States? Milbank Q. 1998;76:517-563. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-po...=r&uid=9879302

World Health Report 2000. Available at: http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/report.htm.

Starfield B. Evaluating the State Children's Health Insurance Program: critical considerations. Annu Rev Public Health. 2000;21:569-585. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-po...r&uid=10884965

Leape L. Unnecessary surgery. Annu Rev Public Health. 1992;13:363-383. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-po...=r&uid=1599594

Phillips D, Christenfeld N, Glynn L. Increase in US medication-error deaths between 1983 and 1993. Lancet. 1998;351:643-644. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-po...=r&uid=9500322

Weingart SN, Wilson RM, Gibberd RW, Harrison B. Epidemiology and medical error. BMJ. 2000;320:774-777. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-po...r&uid=10720365

Guyer B, Hoyert D, Martin J, Ventura S, MacDorman M, Strobino D. Annual summary of vital statistics 1998. Pediatrics. 1999;104:1229-1246. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-po...r&uid=10585972

Harrold LR, Field TS, Gurwitz JH. Knowledge, patterns of care, and outcomes of care for generalists and specialists. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:499-511. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-po...r&uid=10491236

Holland E, Degruy F. Drug-Induced Disorders - November 1, 1997 - American Family Physician "...more than 1 million patients are injured while in the hospital and approximately 180,000 die because of these injuries." Page Unavailable -- American Academy of Family Physicians

[Aaron]

FDA advisers tied to industry

FDA advisers tied to industry

An article by Dennis Cauchon, the USA TODAY Newspaper
Sept. 25, 2000

According to a USA Today study, more than half of the experts hired to advise the government on the safety and effectiveness of medicine have financial relationships with the pharmaceutical companies that will be helped or hurt by their decisions. These experts are hired to advise the Food and Drug Administration on which medicines should be approved for sale, what the warning labels should say and how studies of drugs should be designed. The experts are supposed to be independent, but USA TODAY found that 54% of the time, they have a direct financial interest in the drug or topic they are asked to evaluate. These conflicts include helping a pharmaceutical company develop a medicine, then serving on an FDA advisory committee that judges the drug.

The conflicts typically include stock ownership, consulting fees or research grants.

Federal law generally prohibits the FDA from using experts with financial conflicts of interest, but according to the article, the FDA has waived the restriction more than 800 times since 1998.
These pharmaceutical experts, about 300 on 18 advisory committees, make decisions that affect the health of millions of Americans and billions of dollars in drugs sales. With few exceptions, the FDA follows the committees' advice.

The FDA reveals when financial conflicts exist, but it has kept details secret since 1992, so it is not possible to determine the amount of money or the drug company involved.

A USA Today analysis of financial conflicts at 159 FDA advisory committee meetings from Jan. 1, 1998, through last June 30 found:

At 92% of the meetings, at least one member had a financial conflict of interest.

At 55% of meetings, half or more of the FDA advisers had conflicts of interest.

Conflicts were most frequent at the 57 meetings when broader issues were discussed: 92% of members had conflicts.

At the 102 meetings dealing with the fate of a specific drug, 33% of the experts had a financial conflict.

"The best experts for the FDA are often the best experts to consult with industry," says FDA senior associate commissioner Linda Suydam, who is in charge of waiving conflict-of-interest restrictions. But Larry Sasich of Public Citizen, an advocacy group, says, "The industry has more influence on the process than people realize."

[Aaron]

FDA Conflict-of-Interest continued:

FDA Conflict-of-Interest continued:

In the book Alternative Medicine Definitive Guide to Cancer, they discuss "How Cancer Politics Have Kept You In the Dark" - Chapter 26. They talk about one study that disclosed that almost 50% of high-ranking FDA officials had been employed by major drug companies immediately before joining the FDA and that half of these officials upon leaving the FDA take up executive jobs in pharmaceutical companies.

Another study that they discuss was printed in the Wall Street Journal in 1992. It revealed that 60% of drug advertisements in medical journals actually violated FDA guidelines, yet the FDA did nothing about those violations.

Yet, in 1985, the FDA teamed up with the Pharmaceutical Advertising Council to use drug industry funds to combat "quackery" in medicine - alternative medicine.

Note: To get an understanding of why the FDA and other organizations are so opposed to "alternative medicine", be sure to read chapter 26 of the above named book - Alternative Medicine Definitive Guide to Cancer and other books, including the section of G. Edward Griffin's book World Without Cancer titled "The Politics of Cancer Therapy", or listen to the audio of the same name on our audio page.

[Aaron]

System to Control Deadly Drug Interaction Failing

System to Control Deadly Drug Interaction Failing

This article written by Andrea Knox for Knight Ridder Newspapers appeared on January 7, 2001 in "The Star," a Ventura County Newspaper.

In the article, it is reported that in the past four years, 10 prescription drugs and a vaccine have been taken off the market after killing and injuring thousands. According to the article, it is estimated that US drug fatalities runs 100,000 a year. There is no way of confirming the numbers because there is no reliable way to track and investigate problems with drugs. Doctors are not even required to report bad drug interactions.
It also doesn't help that the FDA has cut the time for routine drug approvals, making the real-life test for drugs coming after it has actually been approved. Without a proper monitoring system, it takes longer to discover what drugs could be causing problems.
Number of physicians in the U.S..........................................700,0 00
Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year................120,000

This information was sent to us indicating that it came from the Benton County News Tribune on the seventeenth of November, 1999

[Aaron]

Great source for articles

Breaking News - herbal healer academy

Herbal Healer Academy been a pioneer in education on natural healing as well as fighting for our rights to use supplements, herbs, etc... Their breaking news link is full of great articles and they post new ones periodically.

[Aaron]

Wisdom from Thomas Jefferson

"If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls who live under tyranny"
Thomas Jefferson (1743 - 1826)

[V'ger]

All -

Still, I'd like to see a more responsible approach to the way alternatives are marketed. So many internet sites are quick to quote rat studies or in vitro studies and infer that humans will have the same results.

That being said, Andrographis has helped me with colds and flu far more than the more traditionally touted herbs and certainly more than the OTC cold remedies that you find at the local drug store.

D-Mannose is "the joint" for bladder infections and doesn't try to do any more than give those bacteria a decoy that they like better than the lining of your bladder. Easy to flush them away after that. (Not for upper urinary tract infections though, when they get that high up, they probably aren't mannose-dependent bacteria).

If you know someone with arthritis, they'll probably be glad to know of Topricin. Homeopathic, which I never took much stock in, but it makes the others look like something you should grease your bicycle with. If you can stand the smell.

I think we need to speak out to our representatives and let them know that we want to chart our OWN course wrt supplements. OTOH there are crappy studies and overzealous marketers on both sides of the fence.

My two bits -

John H.

[admin]

natural quackery

Hi John,

I agree. There is as much quackery in the "alternative medicine" industry as there is in "conventional medicine".

At least with natural supplements, it is extremely rare that any documented cases of side effects exist and with pharmaceuticals it is the norm.

I have spent thousands of hours in Entrez PubMed which has an extensive database of studies by conventional medical teams and it is amazing how many studies show that many supplements have been proven to be very effective not only in mice but also in humans...especially vitamin c and cancer in humans.

Another thing that comes into play is how to properly interpret studies and many conventional studies and the statistics attached to them are absolutely manipulated to give the illusion of effectiveness, which often benefits the ones who funded the study. This is common in these studies. This would be a great exploration in showing how to actually interpret studies.

(posted by Aaron as the moderator)

[henrii]

A newbie here

Hi Pamela Sweda and all!

I do agree on this thread. Conventional medicine is CAPITALISM, almost for money making and not to intentionally help suffering humans. A certain group produces disease/s, then they apparently produces medicines which is/are not really working, or the main purpose is just to suppress (with notable results) the disease/s and not really for a cure. Then going to hospitals while they drain your finances... And finally they say there is nothing more they can do with your disease/s soon after your love ones would find you in your graves.. A sad story for an example of a cancer patient that in my opinion can be treated. 'They' suppress us with knowledge and simple technology to cure our diseases. I believe this is happening.

On alternative medicines or food supplements, there is also some quackery behind. A good and bad doctors, good and bad capitalist, iridologist, marketer and so on. In all walks of life we encounter this.

When I became really sick, I had tried herbals, vitamins, structured water and I was even a vegetarian then. I researched what was good for my lungs, and made a little difference even though I had spent big bucks already but the progress was slow. I finally built a device that solved it fast in my opinion, and raise my vitality as well. I am not saying those alternative medicines are not effective or pure quackery, I did say "some quackery". I did say some quackery because the practitioner, malpractice and the marketer as well, exaggerates. In my practice in iridology before, I had seen my clients getting real results with their ailments using 'food supplements' or you may call it alternative oral medicines. You may find certain supplements/devices don't work for you while others are like bullet trains.

Henrii

[Kevin]

The world of alternatives

henrii,

Great post!

I find conventional medicine to be almost guaranteed to make one worse in the long run. There are a few exceptions, most triage being an exception.

In the world of alternative modalities, it is almost like the wild west! There is so much out there, but at least it is there and we have a choice.

With research and study, checking others experiences, you can find a nugget of gold here and there.

Over the decades I have found several nuggets. It has not bothered me in the least that I had to wade through much that was not for me.

I am most thankful that I had the choice. The result is that I am alive today, whereas if restricted to allopathic medicine, I surely would have exited this body already.

[henrii]

Feeling welcome

Kevin,

Thanks for your comments. I do now feel welcome here Me too, I may be floating now in our universe or I don't know how many universe there are I am writing an article about my self how i healed myself and then some, but it is unfinished and I am not really sure if it is appropriate to post it here though. Maybe on my own future website


To GOOD HEALTH, Cheers!
Henrii

[Aaron]

Urgent Call To Action - Please Read

CALL TO ACTION



The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is working hard to take away YOUR rights to safe and effective natural healing methods. They want to make criminals out of anyone suggesting these remedies unless they are licensed by the medical system. It is only a matter of time if they get their way that you will need a prescription in order to drink cranberry juice. Please do not think this is a joke.

"If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny."
- Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the U.S.A., writer of Declaration of Independence

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.“ - Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the U.S.A., writer of Declaration of Independence

"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves: and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform them."
- Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the U.S.A., writer of Declaration of Independence

"The Constitution of this Republic should make special provision for Medical Freedom as well as Religious Freedom. To restrict the art of healing to one class of men and deny equal privileges to others will constitute a bastille [prison] of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic."
- Benjamin Rush, M.D., signer of the Declaration of Independence

WHAT CAN YOU DO?


Immediately go to Citizens for Health | the voice of the natural health consumer and educate yourself on the matter.

Go to Save Our Supplements - Protect Your Access to Safe, Effective & Affordable Dietary Supplements and you can simply enter your zip code into the form and click submit. It will show you automatic form letters to send to your state representatives.

If you do not become involved in fighting against the FDA, calling your representatives local and in DC, the FDA will have supreme dictatorship over your personal health. Do not be misled by their flowery convoluted language appearing to want to help you. It is a criminal conspiracy to take away your rights so that the pharmaceutical companies and their control over the FDA and the American medical system have the entire market at their disposal without competition. You health will be owned by them lock, stock and barrel.

The FDA will consider spirituality a medical treatment if they get their way. It will be considered mind-body medicine. This is an insult to God and our God-given rights. Please stand up and say no to the FDA and to any form of medicalization of natural God-given methods of healing. They are going too far.

They claim qigong or anything like this will not be regulated by them but if you give them an inch, they will take a hundred miles. Do not give them one foothold on our rights. If you want to rub lotion on someone's back, this will be regulated!??

Homeopathy will be considered a drug??? This is ridiculous.

If you lose your heath care rights, you will soon lose all of your rights to life, liberty and you will be unable to pursue any happiness. What has happened to America?


Call your friends, organize meetings, call your representatives over and over and over. Send letters to your state representatives, the senators, the congressmen, your mayor, the governor, the media, television, newspaper, radio and to your local schools. Demand that they oppose the FDA’s regulation of natural healing modalities.

The FDA’s unconstitutional manifesto is available here:
http://www.fda.gov/cber/gdlns/altmed.pdf

[Aaron]

28 Senators vote to maintain Big Pharma monopoly over U.S. consumers

NewsTarget.com printable article

Originally published May 7 2007 28 Senators vote to maintain Big Pharma monopoly over U.S. consumers; Republicans oppose free trade for medicine

FROM: 28 Senators vote to maintain Big Pharma monopoly over U.S. consumers; Republicans oppose free trade for medicine

by Mike Adams

On May 3rd, 2007, U.S. Senators voted on an amendment to the 2007 Prescription Drug User Fee bill that aims to reform the FDA and enhance drug safety. This amendment, known as the "Dorgan Amendment No. 990," threatened to break Big Pharma's monopoly over pharmaceutical sales and allow U.S. consumers, cities, states and businesses to purchase their pharmaceuticals from safety-certified pharmacies located in Canada, Japan, the U.K. and other nations.

Americans currently pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. Canadians, Europeans, and even citizens of Mexico pay only about one-half to as little as one-tenth the price paid by Americans for the very same chemicals. Drug companies actually import many of the raw materials used in pharmaceuticals from other countries, meaning that some U.S. medicines are already sourced from countries like the U.K. and Germany.

Drug companies mark up their prescription drugs as much as 569,000% over the price of the raw materials. (A typical markup is more in the 30,000% - 50,000% range.) Retailing pharmaceuticals is hugely profitable. There is no business in the world with more profit built in to the retail price of the product. The purpose of restricting Americans from buying drugs from other countries is to enforce a medical monopoly in the United States, forcing consumers to purchase drugs at the highest prices in the world, further padding the profits of powerful and influential pharmaceutical corporations who exert strong influence over the Bush Administration and Republican lawmakers.

The FDA has, over the past several years, colluded with drug companies to maintain a monopoly market in the United States in order to protect those profits. It has taken actions such as raiding a bus load of senior citizens returning to the U.S. from Canada, searching the elderly for legal drugs. The FDA has gone to great lengths to pressure U.S. customs to seize pharmaceutical shipments being imported for sale to individual consumers in the United States, and it has even invoked the fantasy-based fear tactic of suggesting that terrorists might adulterate pharmaceuticals coming to the U.S. from Canada (and therefore we should all buy our drugs only from U.S. monopoly-controlled pharmacies because of "terrorists").

Dorgan amendment proposes free trade for medicine

The Dorgan amendment, entitled, "Pharmaceutical Market Access and Drug Safety Act of 2007," proposes what is essentially a free trade policy on prescription medications. It would allow Americans to buy their drugs from certain certified organizations registered as valid importers or exporters. The bill states, "...a prescription drug is neither safe nor effective to an individual who cannot afford it," and goes on to describe rigorous safety requirements that would be required by the amendment, including safety inspections and registrations as well as funding efforts to locate and shut down fraudulent internet sales of counterfeit prescription drugs.

If passed into the law, this amendment would save U.S. citizens, businesses, and government entities (local, state and federal) billions of dollars each year by allowing them to source medications in a price competitive environment. Many cities and states are right now facing the very real possibility of bankruptcy due to health care costs (providing benefits to current and former government employees). A large percentage of those costs are spent on monopoly-priced pharmaceuticals. This Dorgan amendment would set city and state governments free to finally engage in fundamental free market price comparisons and save substantial sums of money in sourcing the very same chemical medications for their employees and retirees.

28 Republicans voted against the Dorgan amendment, voting to enforce the pharmaceutical monopoly and keep Big Pharma in control of virtually the entire U.S. medication market. There were no Democrats that voted against the amendment. But why would 28 Republican Senators vote against breaking a marketplace monopoly and encouraging the use of free market economics to save American consumers billions of dollars? The answer isn't complicated: Because nearly all of them have taken money from pharmaceutical companies!

The Big Pharma 28

Here's the list of the 28 Senators who voted to protect Big Pharma's monopoly:

Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lugar (R-IN)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Thomas (R-WY)
Voinovich (R-OH)

These Senators cite "safety concerns" as a reason for enforcing a U.S. monopoly on prescription drugs and allowing Big Pharma to bilk Americans out of billions of dollars by operating an obvious profiteering scheme. But the truth is that the price you pay for a drug does not affect its safety. And those concerned that adulterated medications from other countries might harm patients conveniently forget that FDA-approved drugs sold in the United States already kill 100,000 Americans each year. It would be difficult to find any source more dangerous than the pharmacies operating in the U.S. right now.

Medications are universally dangerous because they are made from synthetic chemicals that simply do not belong in the human body. Every drug has unintended side effects which include nutritional deficiencies, biochemical imbalances, liver damage, heart damage and even death. Vioxx alone -- which was approved by the FDA and heavily pushed by drug company advertising -- reportedly killed well over 50,000 Americans according to the FDA's own senior drug safety scientist Dr. David Graham. The idea that prescription drugs are safe is ludicrous, and trying to "ensure drug safety" by forcing Americans to pay the highest prices in the world for dangerous synthetic chemicals is a logical fallacy and nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to protect the profiteering drug racket while claiming to be protecting the public.

President Bush has promised to veto the bill if the Dorgan amendment stands. Free trade for medicine simply will not be tolerated in the United States. There's too much money at stake.

62 Senators supported the amendment


Here's the list of the 63 Senators who voted in favor of the Dorgan amendment and, hence, free trade for medicines:

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Craig (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Grassley (R-IA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Nine Senators did not vote

Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Brownback (R-KS)
Dodd (D-CT)
Graham (R-SC)
Hatch (R-UT)
Johnson (D-SD)
McCain (R-AZ)
Warner (R-VA)