207LikesA yahoo group link won't cut it I'm afraid.Originally Posted by soubresauts
Please produce some actual evidence.
A yahoo group link won't cut it I'm afraid.
Please produce some actual evidence.
The article at the Yahoo group link is fully referenced. Evidence is evidence.
You can lead a horse to water...
Here's a shorter article, exposing one of the big lies of the WHO.
WHO(m) do you believe?
Ah, I see what you've done there! Very good.
Unfortunately your "evidence" is pseudo-scientific garbage.
How would you know? You haven't even read it.
I never mentioned the EPA i have know idea what you are talking about i think you are confused. If its lies prove it you havent posted one link on this thread yet to back up anything you are saying.I have little time but allow me to say this, the EPA does not control drugs or its gunk...thats the job of the FDA.
Now if you have any clear evidence of the FDA allowing unfit vaccines to be administered to people please post it up.
Additionally your sums in regarding mercury, your post are incorrect..or frankly lies.
Kindly refer to the global protocol....then come back.
If you want evidence of the FDA allowing drugs on the market that dont work or are harmfull then i will direst you to here:
FDA Fails to Protect Americans from Dangerous Drugs and Unsafe Foods ~ Newsroom ~ News from CSPI ~ Center for Science in the Public InterestAllegations that unsafe drugs are approved
Some critics believe that the FDA has been too willing to overlook safety concerns in approving new drugs, and is slow to withdraw approved drugs once evidence shows them to be unsafe. Rezulin (troglitazone) and Vioxx (rofecoxib) are high-profile examples of drugs approved by the FDA which were later withdrawn from the market for posing unacceptable risks to patients.
Troglitazone is a diabetes drug that was also available abroad at the time the FDA approved it. Post-marketing safety data indicated that the drug had dangerous side-effects (in this case liver failure). The drug was pulled off that market in the UK in 1997, but was not withdrawn by the FDA until 2000, before which time it is claimed that thousands of Americans were injured or killed by the drug.[28]
In the case of Vioxx, a pre-approval study indicated that a group taking the drug had four times the risk of heart attacks when compared to another group of patients taking another anti-inflammatory, naproxen.[29] The FDA approval board accepted the manufacturer's argument that this was due to a previously unknown cardioprotective effect of naproxen, rather than a risk of Vioxx, and the drug was approved. In 2005, the results of a randomized, placebo-controlled study showed that Vioxx users suffered a higher rate of heart attacks and other cardiovascular disorders than patients taking no medication at all.[30] Faced with numerous lawsuits, the manufacturer voluntarily withdrew it from the market in 2004. The example of Vioxx has been prominent in an ongoing debate over whether new drugs should be evaluated on the basis of their absolute safety, or their safety relative to existing treatments for a given condition.
David Graham, a scientist in the Office of Drug Safety within the CDER, testified to Congress that he was pressured by his supervisors not to warn the public about dangers of drugs like Vioxx. He argued that an inherent conflict of interest exists when the office responsible for post-approval monitoring of drug safety is controlled by the same organization which initially approved those same drugs as safe and effective.[28] In a 2006 survey sponsored by the Union of Concerned Scientists, almost one-fifth of FDA scientists said they "have been asked, for non-scientific reasons, to inappropriately exclude or alter technical information or their conclusions in a FDA scientific document."[31]
Here:
Criticism of the Food and Drug Administration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Here:
Dangerous Drugs - Prescription Drugs with Hazardous or Severe Side Effects
Here:
FDA Announces 20 Dangerous Drugs You Should NOT Be On
Here:According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), adverse drug reactions from drugs that are properly prescribed and properly administered cause about 106,000 deaths per year, making prescription drugs the fourth-leading cause of death in the U.S. Compare this to the death toll from illegal drugs -- which is about 10,000 per year -- and you begin to see the magnitude of the problem, and the magnitude of the coverup.
How Big Pharma Distorts Science to Get FDA Approval for Dangerous Drugs | Alternet
Here:
FDA Approved Vaccine with Autism and SIDS Listed as Adverse Events, Vaccine Safety Website Removes Information | Vactruth.com
Go back to your post and mercury in water and its level.....
I never link, never its all in my brain....
Your links support your view, and is a sign of someone who doesnt understand something but uses a link.
What medical/ scientific qualifications do you have?
Look through the thread I advised Armchair on how to present the data, and analysis.
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience" - Mark Twain
I suggest you look at the evidence, and then come back to us.
As for quotes, here are two relevant ones:
"It is a fortunate thing for rulers that people do not think."
"The broad mass of a nation ... will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one."
-- Adolf Hitler
and how grateful I am for it, I now understand why practically everyone involved in the argument against big pharma/government corruption is practically a laughing stock among academics; emotions.
well anyway, what do you know in that head of yours about aspartame? you know the artificial sweetener they allow in soft drinks and candy. There's alot of stuff the FDA have allowed that shouldnt and stuff that should be allowed made illegal. Its difficult to gauge the efficiency of the FDA based on the consistent amount of fault stories piling out of so called alternative media. I can only take their word on things when there seems to be an inceasing amount of expert 'whistleblowers' with Phds in this that or the other.
Last edited by Armchair Activist; 8th January 2013 at 08:31 PM.
