Some useful information here:
https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/home-family-pets/how-to-diagnose-and-treat-osteoarthritis/
A Chance Plane Ride
Years ago, a friend of mine was seated on a plane next to a chief executive of a major American chemical company that was notorious for polluting the environment and sickening large numbers of Americans with its products. After building a friendly rapport, my friend asked the executive what he considered the most important piece of advice he had to share. The executive immediately responded:
Always wash new clothes before you put them on.
I’ve never forgotten that story, and over time, my patients have helped me appreciate how many dangerous chemicals end up on our clothing.
How Your Clothes and Their Materials Shape Your Health
•Many dangerous chemicals end up in clothing and cosmetic products because there is almost no regulation of these products. Unless we take precautions, their toxins can enter us through our skin.
•Tight and constrictive clothing (e.g., ties or pants) can be particularly detrimental to health. This is best demonstrated with bras, a recent cultural invention that cause a significant number of issues. Worse still, their usage has been strongly linked to breast cancer.
•This article will also share the strategies for cultivating a healthy wardrobe.
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/how-your-clothes-and-their-materials-231
Majority of COVID Surveys About Infection, Testing, Vaccination, Treatment ‘Classified as Fraud’: Peer-Reviewed Journal ‘JMIR Formative Research’
A new study published Friday in the peer-reviewed journal JMIR Formative Research found that 59.40% of web-based surveys about individuals’ COVID-19 attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, are fraudulent.
https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/majority-of-covid-surveys-about-infection
‘Trust the Science’? Drug Development, Medical Research Tainted by Scientific Fraud as 10,000 Research Papers Retracted in 2023 Alone (Journal ‘Nature’)
“Corruption is creeping into the system,” admits Oxford University professor.
Skyrocketing peer-review fraud has caused a record-breaking 10,000+ sham research papers to be retracted in 2023 alone.
Experts are calling the startling revelation “only the tip of the iceberg.”
Last year’s deluge of fraudulent papers means that the total number of retractions issued so far has passed 50,000, according to a recent Nature analysis.
https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/trust-the-science-drug-development
Big Pharma Paid Over $1 Billion to Influence Medical Research from 2020-2022 in BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine
58.9% of journal reviewers received pharmaceutical industry payments, revealing massive industry conflict of interest.
A new research letter published October 10, 2024 in the peer-reviewed publisher JAMA reveals that reviewers for major medical journals have received $1.06 billion in pharmaceutical industry payments, highlighting significant conflicts of interest within medical research.
The letter begins by emphasizing the existence of “conflicts of interest of journal editors and authors” and that “the traditionally opaque nature of peer review has hindered their evaluation among peer reviewers, despite their crucial role in academic publishing.”
The authors point out that while most journals have established conflict of interest policies for authors, “fewer extend these policies to peer reviewers.”
They write that “reviewer conflict of interest disclosures are rare” and “leading medical journals may have industry ties due to their academic expertise.”
The U.S., Canadian, and Japanese researchers sought to characterize payments by drug and medical device manufacturers to U.S. peer reviewers of major medical journals.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, these journals experienced an unprecedented surge in citations, particularly for their COVID-related publications.
The new letter raises questions about these journals being relied upon for accurate and unbiased information, especially during a pandemic.
The authors conclude by calling for “additional research and transparency regarding industry payments in the peer review process.”
Top Medical Journals
The letter identified peer reviewers for The British Medical Journal (BMJ), Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) using each journal’s 2022 reviewer list.
“These journals were selected for their high impact factor and reputation as leading publications of original general medical research,” the letter reads.
After extracting general and research payments to the identified peer reviewers between 2020 and 2022 from the Open Payments database, the researchers captured payments from drug and medical device manufacturers to US-licensed physicians.
Nearly 60% of Reviewers Took $1.06 Billion from Pharma Industry Over 3 Years
A total of 1,962 unique reviewers were identified, with 145 (7.4%) reviewing for more than one journal.
Between 2020 and 2022, 1,155 reviewers (58.9%) received pharmaceutical industry payments: 54.0% accepted general payments, and 31.8% received payments for research.
Between 2020 and 2022, reviewers received an astounding $1.06 billion in industry payments, with 94.0% ($1 billion) going to individuals or institutions and a median research payment of $153,173.
“Reviewers received $1.06 billion in industry payments between 2020 and 2022, including $1.00 billion (94.0%) to individuals or their institutions and $64.18 million (6.0%) in general payments,” the letter reads.
“Consulting fees and speaking compensation unrelated to continuing medical education programs accounted for $34.31 million and $11.80 million, respectively. Over the 3 years, the median general payment was $7614 (IQR, $495-$43 069) and the median research payment was $153 173 (IQR, $29 307-$835 637) among reviewers receiving such payments.”
https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/big-pharma-paid-over-1-billion-to
Covid’s heart risks misled to scare people not in danger
(Tom: The gaslighting, misinformation, disinformation, manipulation and downright lying continues…)
The study, out on Wednesday, appears to have found NO extra long-term cardiovascular risks for most people infected with Covid. But the Cleveland Clinic, NIH, and the authors pretended the opposite.
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/urgent-authors-of-a-big-new-paper
Billions Worldwide Face Micronutrient Deficiencies, Study Finds
- A balanced diet is important for proper nutrition, but many people fall short on essential micronutrients due to consuming energy-dense but nutrient-poor foods
- Micronutrient deficiencies lead to significant health issues like pregnancy complications, weakened immunity and increased risk of diseases
- A recent study published in The Lancet Global Health found that over half of the global population is lacking essential micronutrients, with deficiencies varying by age and gender
- The researchers found that more than 5 billion people are deficient in iodine (68%), vitamin E (67%) and calcium (66%), while over 4 billion lack iron (65%), riboflavin (55%), folate (54%) and vitamin C (53%)
- In the U.S., common nutrient deficiencies include vitamins D, B12, B1, B2, B3, A, C and E, as well as calcium, magnesium and iodine. Tips to address these deficiencies are included in the article.
Why DMSO Belongs In Your MedHealth Kit!
- DMSO is a remarkably safe chemical that protects cells from otherwise fatal stressors (e.g., freezing, burning, shockwaves, ischemia)
- Since the heart, brain, and spinal cord are particularly vulnerable to injury, DMSO can produce miraculous results when those injuries happen
- Despite decades of research, many serious shortcomings exist with how we treat strokes (including brain bleeds), heart attacks, and spinal cord injuries
- As I will show here, had the FDA not sabotaged DMSO’s adoption, in addition to countless lives being saved, millions could have been protected from a lifetime of disability or paralysis
Sanctimonious Hypocrisy by Prescription – by Keith Scott-Mumby
The orthodox “health industry” is claiming that wellness is a bad idea. Why? It eats into their profits, of course!
So their platform is that all aspects of self-care, alternatives to drugs and surgery, diet and nutrition are bad, could kill the patients (as if) and is morally, even legally, wrong. Besides, it’s “not scientific”.
“Wellness companies use the same strategies as evidence-based medicine, they claim, to sell tests for diseases that don’t exist and treatments that don’t work, recommended by individuals who aren’t qualified.” So says a rant by a couple of apologists, Andrea Love, PhD, and Katie Suleta, DHSc, MPH, MS, writing for MedPage Today.
No mention in this publication of the fact that MILLIONS of patients are being killed by the clumsy, pseudo-scientific orthodox medicine approach that they are boasting of.
Of course the medical profession peddles diseases that don’t exist and treatments that don’t work, but that’s OK. Forget the fact that outcomes are deplorable. It’s business as usual, fighting down the competitors!
We all remain conscious of the startling paper in 2000 published by the late Barbara Starfield of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, which revealed that doctors are the 3rd leading cause of death in the US! (after cancer and heart disease).
These deaths consist of:
• 12,000 – unnecessary surgeries
• 7,000 – medication errors in hospitals
• 20,000 – other errors in hospitals
• 80,000 – infections acquired in hospitals
• 106,000 – non-error, negative effects of drugs
The last figure needs some explanation. She is saying that over 100,000 patients a year are dying of medications correctly prescribed, at the correct dose (in other words, not errors) but still proved fatal.*
That’s a total of 250,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes! Iatrogenic is a Greek word which means “caused by doctors”.1
I don’t know if you consider that a quarter of a million deaths per year is a lot, in a population of around 300 million. But it ought to be zero, or very close. 250,000 a year is equivalent to a million people killed by doctors every four years, in just one country.
Gary Null et al. gives a far higher number but we’ll stick with Starfield. See Gary’s piece here.
Now Starfield only calculated deaths. What about permanent injury or damage? Frederick van Pelt, a doctor who works for The Chartis Group, a health care consultancy, said another element of harm that is often overlooked is the number of severe patient injuries resulting from medical error.
“‘Some estimates would put this number at 40 times the death rate,’ van Pelt said.”
*Actually, according to Starfield, who prepared the report for The Journal of the American Medical Association, doctors are actually the number one killer, because they do not inform patients properly of the hazards of the procedures they offer (why would they? The patient might have second thoughts and that would lose income for the doctor!)
But That’s Not All Of It!
It’s not just about errors of judgement and treatments. Misdiagnosis resulting in (of course) inappropriate and potentially harmful treatments is also rampant. A recent groundbreaking study published in BMJ Quality & Safety (2024) that found approximately 795,000 Americans suffer permanent disability or death annually due to diagnostic errors.2
Cancer blunders seem exceptionally likely. In 2012 The National Cancer Institute convened an expert panel which determined that MILLIONS of individuals may have been wrongly diagnosed with “cancer” of the breast, prostate, thyroid, and lung, when in fact their conditions were likely harmless, and should have been termed “indolent or benign growths of epithelial origin.”
Importantly, no radical change occurred in the conventional practice of cancer diagnosis, prevention, or treatment. Nothing improved. The harvesting of human suffering continued as before.
This is overdiagnosis to raise funds (not to help patients).
Along with overdiagnosis is the problem of overtreatment. When non-threatening abnormalities are labeled as “cancer,” women often undergo aggressive treatments that can cause significant harm with no real benefit. Surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy are not without serious dangers, never mind side-effect.
Yet these are handed out as if there was not, and could not be, any complications. Mastectomy can be very hurtful. If it’s not necessarily then it becomes a major criminal assault, as in indictable offence in my view.
Then there are the numerous multiple hormone treatments, messing about with a woman’s sacred physiology, all in pursuit of profits, not better health.
The scale is just mind boggling. A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine some years ago estimated that over a 30-year period, 1.3 million U.S. women were over-diagnosed and overtreated for breast cancer.3
If you do the math, that’s 70,000 women a year receiving unnecessary treatment. Most appallingly, that includes an estimated 20,000-25,000 women undergoing needless mastectomies or lumpectomies annually.4 A quarter of a million breast “amputations” per decade. Makes me shudder.
Yet orthodox apologists and the goons they defend dare to criticize alternative healers who, in a way, are protecting patients from the full onslaught of this greed and industrialized medicine. There are days when I wake up ashamed of my beloved profession!
https://alternative-doctor.com/sanctimonious-wellness-hypocrisy-by-prescription/
The Distribution of Pharmaceutical Injuries
One of the fundamental principles in statistics is that variable phenomena tend to distribute on a bell curve, with the average value (e.g., adult American men being 5’9—which is a bit above the global average) being by far the most common, while values become exponentially rarer as they move further away from that mean (e.g., only 15% of adult American men are at least six feet tall).
Sensitivity to pharmaceuticals and environmental toxins (e.g., synthetic chemicals) follows a similar pattern, with a minority of the population existing which is extremely sensitive to these things (and conversely, on the end of the bell curve, another minority exists on the opposite end which has a very high tolerance to them).
The important thing about this principle is that it can frequently allow you to infer a great deal from limited data. For example:
•Shortly after the COVID-19 vaccines entered the market, I had multiple people contact me to share that a loved one had died suddenly—something I’d never seen with any other vaccine. Given how frequently the standard vaccines cause significant injuries (e.g., the independent studies that have been done collectively show that the childhood vaccines cause between a 1.5 to 40 times increase in the rates of chronic illness), I immediately inferred that around 10% of recipients would experience significant side effects—which is insane for something being given to everyone. Later, large surveys showed 7% of recipients believed they’d had a “major effect from the vaccine,” 13.4% stated they’d developed a “severe health issue” after COVID vaccination, and 34% reported “minor effects” from the vaccine.
•After Ozempic hit the market, I began seeing a large number of people with minor or moderate issues from it. Because of this, I correctly inferred serious side effects would begin emerging, especially once the higher dose for weight loss began being used.
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/how-your-clothes-and-their-materials-231