Posts Tagged Pfizer
November 9, 2014
The new documentary Bought dives deeply into the inner workings of the industries at the core of our food and healthcare system, exploring the truth about how vaccines and drugs are developed and rushed to market and the ongoing secrecy behind the genetic engineering of our food supply.
For a limited time proceeds from renting or purchasing this film will be donated to the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), a non-profit organization advocating for vaccine safety and informed consent protection in the public health system.
Filmmaker Jeff Hays believes, as I do, that you have a right to the truth so that you can make educated decisions about your health, food, and medicine. Unfortunately, the truth is not easy to come by today.
Like the banks, the food and drug industries have grown more powerful and less transparent over time, and profit has become the primary motive. Hays may be best known for his 2012 documentary “Doctored,” which exposes how the medical and drug industry conspire to control the health care system.
Hays’ new film peels back the layers to show how the drug, vaccine, and chemical technology industries have joined forces as one supervillain, with its “undisclosed location” smack-dab in the middle of the White House.
You can’t effectively address one industry without addressing them all, as they are now inextricably linked. Until enough people raise their voices, nothing is likely to change. According to Hays:1
“From opiates, to statins, to a blizzard of psychotropic medications that do far more harm than good, the film covers how our entire health care system, from education to practice has been Bought… three story lines converge on Wall Street, in a tale of corruption, greed and shocking lack of conscience.”
Federal Vaccine Court: Designed Specifically to Clean Up the Trail of Destruction Left by Vaccines
Vaccines are a $30 billion per year industry. Today, four dominate the world market (Pfizer, Merck, Sanofi Pasteur, and GlaxoSmithKline). Given the furor that erupts when anybody publicly questions vaccine safety, you would assume that the US government considers vaccines completely safe.
But in reality, that’s not the case as evidenced by the establishment of a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) where vaccine injury claims are decided in a Federal Vaccine Court2 to compensate vaccine victims, but in reality protects the vaccine industry from lawsuits. The official line by federal health officials is that vaccines are safe and never cause autism.
However, the fact is that for many years, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice and the Federal Vaccine Court have been quietly settling cases of brain inflammation and permanent brain damage (encephalopathy) that included symptoms of autism.
These VICP awards have been made to cover treatments related to autism. The VCIP was established in 1986 when Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act,3 which protected vaccine manufacturers, pediatricians and other vaccine providers from nearly all civil liability for injuries and deaths caused by government recommended and mandated vaccines.
If vaccines are so safe, then why has the government set up a federal compensation program specifically to manage the damage they cause? In Bought, families who have won and lost in Vaccine Court share their heartbreaking stories.
These parent and health care professionals speaking out about their experiences are articulate, knowledgeable, and compelling witnesses to the damage that vaccines and one-size-fits-all vaccine policies have done. They are not part of some anti-vaccine campaign—in fact, the reason they were in Vaccine Court is because of what happened when they DID vaccinate their children!
Most Vaccine Reactions Are Never Connected to Vaccines
Proving causation is extremely difficult with vaccine injuries in part because there are huge gaps in vaccine safety science and, also, unless a vaccine reaction is immediate and obvious, parents may not connect their child’s deterioration in health to the shots the child was given.
When parents report their child’s regression into chronic poor health following vaccination to their child’s pediatrician, they are typically told the illness couldn’t possibly be related to the vaccine or vaccinations the child was given.
Sometimes reactions occur within hours or days of vaccination and are dramatic and life threatening and the child is taken to the emergency room and the vaccine reaction symptoms are recorded in the child’s medical record. Usually, only the most clear cut and identifiable vaccine reactions end up in Vaccine Court—the ones where the “dots” are easily connected.
Unfortunately, at that point the damage is done and the child may be left with lifelong chronic illness and disability. The vast majority of vaccine adverse reactions are never reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Still, CDC’s VAERS database4 lists 8,000 different adverse vaccine reactions, from localized swelling and anaphylactic shock to autism, coma, and death.5
Because of the factors already discussed, the actual number of reactions is probably much higher than the database reports. As vaccine safety advocate Dawn Loughborough said in “Bought:”
“We used to have this idea we were protecting children from infectious diseases. And we created the National Vaccine program with children in mind, but somewhere in time protecting the program became more important than what’s happening to our children.”
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
By: Jon Rappoport
[NaturalNews] Melinda Gates has just unrolled her new program to reduce population in Africa and South Asia. Speaking at the Family Planning Summit in London, the other half of the Gates-Messiah operation pledged to bring contraception to millions of women and girls in the Third World.
Flying under the radar; however, is the partnership between The Gates Foundation and drug giant, Pfizer, and therein lies the dirty little secret.
The method of choice to prevent births? Injectable Depo-Provera, long known as a highly dangerous drug. It actually carries a black-box warning on its label, stating that severe bone loss is a consequence of its use. It also thins the vaginal lining, and research is ongoing to investigate the possibility that it increases the risk of breast cancer.
Here is the relevant black-box quote: “Women who use Depro-Provera Contraceptive Injection may lose significant bone mineral density. Bone loss is greater with increased duration of use and may not be completely reversible.”
Change.org and several other groups are petitioning the US Congress to cut all federal funding for Depo-Provera.
Despite cheerful PR about education of women on the benefits of contraception, and the need for informed consent, these programs have a way of turning into something else out in the field, where the needle meets the body.
Depo-Provera also happens to be a drug of choice for the “chemical castration” of male sex offenders. That fact testifies to its powerful impact on the body.
Nobody at the London Family Planning Summit was talking about Depo-Provera and its severe effects. The conference sponsors, the UN Population Fund, the USAID, and The Gates Foundation, are far more interested in population control.
If millions of girls and women in Africa and South Asia are crippled by the Depo-Provera injections, well, that’s just collateral damage. Several years from now, we’ll no doubt see studies claiming an unexplained epidemic of osteoporosis in the Third World, which will lead to the application of some other highly toxic drug as the treatment of choice.
Pfizer, the maker of Depo-Provera, happens to make such a drug: Fablyn (Lasofoxifene). So far, the FDA has withheld approval, but the EU gave it the green light in 2009. Fablyn has a serious problem. It causes blood clots in veins, which can be life-threatening.
Watch out, Africa. Melinda’s coming with Pfizer. You should ask her why she doesn’t supply money to clean up contaminated water supplies, install rudimentary sanitation, provide real nutrition, and help restore stolen fertile land to local farmers.
But you see, those actions aren’t in line with the elite agenda. They make things better. The agenda is dedicated to Worse.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
By: J. D. Heyes
[NaturalNews] Regular readers of NaturalNews.com know that we always advocate first for a natural solution or alternative to Big Pharma. Beyond that; however, when there is no other choice, you will find us regularly siding with you, the hapless consumer, who is constantly victimized by an out-of-control industry.
With that in mind and the cost of Big Pharma products being what they are, we believe the health consumer deserves, at the very least, to pay the lowest possible price for medications, when there are lower-cost alternatives out there.
Therein lies the problem. An alarming number of Big Pharma corporations are trying to hold onto their patented products for as long as possible – and in more cases, longer than allowed – because they don’t want to see lower-cost options hitting the market.
The latest case involves AstraZenica, which has just been smacked by a federal judge for attempting to block the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of generic versions of its antipsychotic drug Seroquel.
The drugmaker’s patent for Seroquel expired in March, but the company contended in federal district court in Washington that safety data it provided to the FDA so the agency would approve two additional pediatric uses for the drug forced it to re-label its packaging, reflecting a warning about hyperglycemia (high blood sugar). That re-labeling, attorneys for the drug manufacturer alleged, entitles the company to exclusivity through December 2012.
Interpretation of the law would ‘create a perverse incentive’ to covet brand names
AstraZenica claimed the FDA acted arbitrarily and capriciously in rejecting its exclusivity rights by approving generic versions of Seroquel. But U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled the FDA was reasonable in its interpretation and applied the Hatch-Waxman Act after determining the safety data submitted by the pharmaceutical company was not essential to the FDA’s approval of the new pediatric uses.
“The FDA’s interpretation of the statute is consistent with its past practice,” Howell said. “The FDA has emphasized that generally applicable safety information in labeling should not be subject to exclusivity.”
The company’s interpretation of Hatch-Waxman – which says every change approved in a supplemental new drug application results in exclusivity – could lead all drug makers to keep exclusivity over their products forever, thereby barring generic competition altogether, by claiming labeling changes over unrelated uses for the drug, the judge said.
“AstraZeneca’s interpretation would create a perverse incentive for pharmaceutical companies to drag out their presentation of vital safety data to the FDA in order to bar generic competition beyond the periods determined acceptable by Congress,” Howell noted in his ruling. “While Congress was no doubt concerned that pharmaceutical manufacturers have incentives to continue research and development in order to discover vital new drugs, Congress plainly did not intend for these manufacturers to retain exclusivity into perpetuity.”
AstraZenica filed its suit against the FDA in March, hours after the agency gave its approval for 10 companies to begin selling generic versions of Seroquel. Five of those companies – Mylan Inc., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd., Lupid Ltd., and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. – had said they were planning to sell the generic versions immediately.
Other Big Pharma corporations trying to keep generics at bay
The FDA granted exclusivity for just the two new pediatric uses. The agency, in a summary judgment motion, said the safety data submitted by Seroquel was not vital to the FDA’s approval of the new pediatric uses. Further, the agency said its approval of the new uses, along with approval of the new labeling which incorporated the safety data, did not warrant extending the exclusivity for all Seroquel uses.
The drug and its variants have been huge moneymakers for AstraZenica, bringing in more than $5.8 billion in sales globally in 2011.
AstraZenica isn’t the only Big Pharma corporation trying to improperly covet its products. Drug giant Pfizer and Indian pharmaceutical company Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., are being sued by five large U.S. retailers for allegedly conspiring to delay delivery of generic versions of Lipitor, the best-selling drug in history.
The anti-trust suit by Walgreen Co., Kroger Co., Safeway Inc., SuperValu, Inc. and HEB Grocery Co. accused the drug makers of running an “overarching anticompetitive scheme” to prevent generic versions of the popular cholesterol-reducing drug off the market until Nov. 30, 2011, some 20 months after the patent for the original formula expired, recent reports said.
Friday, July 13, 2012
By: Willow Tohi
[NaturalNews] Feeling a little run down? Are you stressed? Someone in the house ill, and you don’t want to get it? In situations like these, many reach for vitamins. By definition vitamins are “organic components in food that are needed…. for maintaining good health.” But do you know how to read the ingredient label on your vitamins? Do you know what those words mean, where the ingredients come from? Who makes them? Most people don’t.
What’s in a brand?
To make sure the money you spend on vitamins is worth it, a good place to start is researching the brand you buy. What is the name of the company that owns and makes your preferred brand? One of the most popular vitamins on the market today is Centrum. Turns out, Centrum is made by Pfizer, the world’s largest pharmaceutical company. Why does this matter? Well for starters, a company that makes billions of dollars in revenue each year on prescription drugs, vaccines, cancer drugs, cardiovascular and metabolic disease treatments, pain, etc. may have a conflict of interest in your having good health. Pfizer was founded as a “manufacturer of fine chemicals.” Chemicals, especially man-made ones (that can be patented for profit), are isolated substances and are processed by the human body as toxins. This is not how vitamins should be made; vitamins made that way cannot be used by the body. Furthermore, Pfizer has a history of health care fraud and illegal marketing of its products.
The old adage “you get what you pay for” is true when it comes to vitamins. You can find inexpensive vitamins in pharmacies, grocery stores, and other big box stores. However, not only are they not good for you, they may be harmful to your health. Purchasing vitamins made with synthetic ingredients is essentially you paying corporations to take their toxic waste off their hands for them. They are made with things such as coal tar, waste and fecal matter, petroleum by-products, stones, metal, animal by-products, etc. Vitamins worth buying are made from whole foods, by companies that make vitamins, not pharmaceuticals. You should be able to look them up, and call and ask what sources their ingredients come from, should you be so inclined.
Beware of marketing
Not to sound jaded but beware of marketed vitamins. If you have to be bombarded to buy, is it really that good? It also takes tons of money to market that way, which raises questions about their bottom line, their ethics toward their customers and the quality of their products. Centrum is the number one selling multivitamin, not because it works but because of its multi-billion dollar ad campaign.
Part of the huge ad campaign includes trumped up claims. Just last week Pfizer faced allegations of deceptive advertising on its Centrum vitamins from a consumer watchdog group. The nonprofit group, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) threatened to sue Pfizer over deceptive claims regarding “breast health,” “heart health,” “colon health,” “bone health,” and “energy and immunity.” Watchdog groups such as CSPI have been taking the lead in policing health claims on supplements since the FDA doesn’t do enough to help consumers in this area.
Just as with “real” food, “real” vitamins don’t need to be marketed on t.v. during prime time. Products that work keep customers coming back and get increased sales through word of mouth.
Currently there is not a whole lot of regulation of supplements. This is a good thing in that the pharmaceutical companies are so big and have so much money that were legislation to make it through, their lobbyists would warp and restrict the supplement industry in a way that would be very bad for consumers, good health, and makers of true vitamins. The down side is that you as a consumer have to take the responsibility for educating yourself as to what you put in your body. Vote with your dollars, and keep good quality supplements on the market.
Sources for this article include:
by: Dr. Mercola
July 9, 2012
Basically, it works by blocking COX-2 enzymes, which become overly active in your body when it becomes inflamed, and is widely used as a form of pain relief; in 2011, 2.4 million Americans received prescriptions for this drug.i
They may have thought twice, however, if they knew the truth behind how this drug came to be … a story that involves cherry-picking of data in attempts to make the drug seem superior to others on the market, when in fact it was not.
Also concerning: Celebrex is the only selective COX-2 inhibitor left on the market, as its close “cousins” were all pulled due to either their killing tens of thousands of people or to their unacceptably high heart risks …
Internal Memos Reveal Deception Surrounding Celebrex Data
New evidence in a lawsuit against Pfizer alleges that the drug company cherry-picked data on its drug Celebrex. Its claim to fame when it came on the market in 1998 was that it relieved pain without causing the gastrointestinal side effects common to other pain-relief drugs like ibuprofen.
Studies showed it didn’t necessarily relieve pain any better than the other drugs on the market, so Pfizer was counting on the gastrointestinal “ticket” to propel the drug into blockbuster status, and, in fact, used its easiness on your stomach as its primary selling point.
The problem was, Celebrex only appeared to be easier on the stomach because Pfizer, and its partner Pharmacia, only released the first six months of data from a year-long study. When the entire data set was looked at, the stomach “benefit” disappeared.
Folks this is what is called a blatant lie of omission and these companies do it on a regular basis. The system even encourages it. Contrary to what many people believe the FDA does no testing of drugs that are to be approved. Nor is there an objective third party that does tests. Rather the system the FDA employs has the drug company pay for and do the studies, and they only submit the studies that support the release of their drug. They are not required to submit failed ones.
That Pfizer withheld the critical data has been known for years, but newly unsealed documents showed this was all part of a carefully calculated plan by Pfizer and Pharmacia execs. While medical directors and scientists at the company expressed feeling uncomfortable with the “data massaging” and “cherry picking” of data, the powers that be moved full steam ahead with their deceptive marketing blitz.
Another reason that you might not be surprised about this report is that Pfizer purchased Monsanto and spun it off as subsidiary called Pharmacia in 1997.ii Most readers of this newsletter will instantly recognize that the bastion of evil, Monsanto, would not be out of place with this type of behavior.
“The documents suggest that officials made a strategic decision during the early trial to be less than forthcoming about the drug’s safety. They show that executives considered attacking the trial’s design before they even knew the results and disregarded the advice of an employee and an outside consultant who had argued the companies should disclose the fact that they were using incomplete data.
… The documents show that in February 2000, Pharmacia employees came up with a game plan on how they might present the findings once they were available … Another document, a slide, proposed explaining poor results through “statistical glitches.””
Do You Still Trust Celebrex?
Celebrex is still being widely used, often by arthritis patients who are desperate for pain relief. But even if you overlook the fact that it’s made by a company that clearly puts profits ahead of patients, it’s much harder to shrug off the very real risks it poses to your heart.
Remember, Celebrex is in the same class of drugs as Vioxx and Vioxx, both of which were pulled from the market because of serious heart risks or killing tens of thousands of people. Celebrex may still be on the market, but it is not immune to these risks!
In 2006, the New England Journal of Medicine released a study that discussed “a significant increase in adjudicated serious cardiovascular events with the use of celecoxib [Celebrex] … an increase in risk by a factor of two or three for … myocardial infarction, stroke, congestive heart failure, or cardiovascular-related death.” The risk was so severe that it “prompted suspension of the administration of celecoxib …”iv
Pfizer actually has a trial that’s ongoing right now that’s supposed to compare the heart risks of Celebrex to those of ibuprofen (Advil/Motrin) and naproxen (Aleve). But though it was started in 2005, it’s not slated to be completed until 2014 … the same year the Celebrex patent expires (at which point the company’s profits for the drug will dwindle … making negative study results far less impacting).
It’s widely known, however, that this painkiller has been linked to increased risks of stomach bleeding, kidney trouble, and liver damage – along with other adverse reactions that can range from mild to deadly. And it’s not at all unusual for a drug company to play up the “fabulous benefits” of their products while conveniently glossing over the fatalities they’ve caused … what would be unusual is if theydidn’t.
Common Diabetes Drugs Associated with Increased Risk of Death
New studies regularly reveal the true risks of many medications, including popular varieties that are used by millions of people. For example, an analysis of nearly 24,000 patients with type 2 diabetes found that three diabetes drugs — glipizide, glyburide, and glimepiride – caused a more than 50 percent greater risk of death compared to another diabetes drug, Metformin.v The three drugs are known as sulfonylureas, which work by spurring your body to produce more insulin.
The drugs not only increased the risk of death among all patients, but among those with heart disease (which is common among those with diabetes), glipizide increased the risk of death by 41 percent, and glyburide by 38 percent compared to Metformin.
Tuesday, July 03, 2012
By: Ethan A. Huff
[NaturalNews] The largest and most comprehensive natural history museum in the Southeast, the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences (NCMNS) is one of the premier educational destinations for both young and old alike to learn about the natural world in a fun, interactive environment. But this beacon of cultural enlightenment has apparently been infiltrated by Monsanto and numerous other corporate interests, all of which were allowed to give presentations at the museum’s recent “Biotechnology Day.”
According to the NCMNS website, the International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE) partnered with Kelly Services, a local staffing agency, to hold the first ever Biotechnology Day at the museum, which was tag-lined with the somewhat menacing phrase “Biotechnology in Your Daily Life!” The stated goal of the event was to “demystify biotechnology” and enlighten the public as to how it affects their everyday lives.
“Organizations (companies, educational institutions, non-profits) from around the state will be participating with hands-on demonstrations, experiments and crafts,” says the event’s description. Included among these presenters were representatives from both the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, which were essentially given an open pulpit from which to indoctrinate the minds of young children into the dogma of drugs and GMOs (genetically-modified organisms).
Monsanto, BASF, and Pfizer all gave presentations at Biotechnology Day
The very first presentation given during Biotechnology Day was titled “A Drug Comes to Market,” and was given by a senior learning technologist from clinical trial giant PPD. Other presentations included “Better Crops for a Better Future,” which was given by a representative of biotechnology giant BASF, as well as another given by the Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences at Campbell University titled “Are You Taking Biotech Medicines?”
There was also a workshop on vaccines given by the CEO of a vaccine company known as Arbovax Inc, as well as a number of exhibits promoting GMOs and the use of emerging biotechnologies for creating “a better life.” Monsanto, the king of the biotechnology castle, even had a deceptive exhibit titled “Applications of Biotechnology to Enhance Crop Productivity.”
A mid-day session included a presentation from a Pfizer engineer who explained to children a little bit more about how proteins are extracted and “purified” for use in biotechnological applications. And the North Carolina State University (NCSU) Biomanufacturing Training and Education Center (BTEC) held a hands-on exhibit where children were taught how to manufacture biotechnology materials using grape soda.
Children roped into supporting drugs and GMOs with fun experiments, arts and crafts, and hands-on experiences
North Carolina’s “Triangle” area, which encompasses the Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill areas in the central part of the state, is dominated by some of the world’s largest biotechnology and drug companies. GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, PPD, BASF, Pfizer, Biogen Idec, Bayer CropScience, and Monsanto all call the Triangle home. And these companies hold significant influence over statewide politics, institutions of higher learning, and health care systems.
With this in mind, it is no surprise that these companies were able to exploit a local museum to brainwash children into supporting the agendas of the drug and GMO industries. And the worst part is that these corporate vultures used arts and crafts, colorful displays, fun experiments, and various other hands-on experiences that children love to do.
Be sure to check out the disturbing lineup of events at NCMNS’ inaugural Biotechnology Day yourself: http://naturalsciences.org/programs-events/biotechnology-day
You can contact NCMNS to share your thoughts about Biotechnology Day at: http://naturalsciences.org/contact-us
Sources for this article include: