RE: The FDA and health (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events



Message


Bettawrekonize -> RE: The FDA and health (7/25/2009 10:12:24 AM)

quote:


(NaturalNews) Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer has agreed to pay $75 million to settle a class action lawsuit filed against it by Nigerian parents who claim the company caused harm to their children by using them as guinea pigs in a nonconsensual, unlicensed drug trial.
...
Eleven of the 200 children in the study died, and parents claim that others suffered from brain damage, organ failure and other severe side effects.
...
In addition to a pending class action suit in the United States, Pfizer may still face criminal prosecution in Nigeria. In January 2008, a Nigerian judge issued arrest warrants for several top company officials after they failed to appear in court.


Pfizer to Pay Tens of Millions for Deaths of Nigerian Children in Drug Trial Experiment

Unfortunately the U.S. is highly unlikely to criminally punish corporations for their atrocities. In the U.S. the rich and the powerful can get away with just about anything under the corporate veil. Corporations that do things like this should be criminally prosecuted, the specific people responsible should personally be criminally prosecuted. I don't care if it's a powerful corporation like Bayer selling Aids tainted blood and the FDA allowing it, both the people from the FDA responsible and those at Bayer should be criminally prosecuted in the U.S. Those involved in that incident were punished in other countries. Why is it in the U.S. rich and powerful corporations can get away with all sorts of atrocities is beyond me. Even in Nigeria they can be criminally prosecuted (they got arrest warrants), why not the U.S.? Just shows who's in charge in this country.


quote:


Parents say they were not told that proven medications were being distributed only yards away, that their children were being enrolled in a drug trial, or that animal studies had suggested that Trovan could cause liver and joint damage.


This sort of thing has happened in the U.S. in the past as well. I suggest people read A Moral Astigmatism by James Jones (here is a preview).

Alternatively you can look up the The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment

quote:


For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,”1 their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all.
...
By the end of the experiment, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis.
...
Even when penicillin was discovered in the 1940s—the first real cure for syphilis—the Tuskegee men were deliberately denied the medication.


The people responsible should be criminally sanctioned. But only in American can the rich and the powerful get away with this sort of thing.




Bettawrekonize -> RE: The FDA and health (8/16/2009 1:23:34 AM)

quote:


Finally, HR 3396, The Congressional Responsibility and Accountability Act, addresses the roughly 90% of federal government law that is enacted not by Congress, as is mandated in the Constitution under the non-delegation doctrine, but by unelected bureaucratic agencies such as the FDA and FTC. As such, it would prohibit any law created by these agencies from being enacted without first being passed by Congress in concordance with Article I of the Constitution.


Ron Paul Introduces Three New Bills Designed to Restore Free Speech to Health

Ron Paul is awesome. We need more good public servants like him. I'm sick and tired of unelected officials (by that I mean not directly elected by the people) passing oppressive laws that are designed to do nothing but serve private interests at public expense. This needs to stop. What I'd really prefer is if these agencies had elected officials running them (officials elected directly by the people) and if these people had term limits every so often (ie: every two years maybe) after which they can run for re - election. I think we need an FDA but their officials need to have a more directly vested interest in serving public and not private interests.

I also found this interesting.

FDA Declares Mercury Amalgam Fillings Safe for All

and this

quote:


Recently, Obama selected as his "Food Czar", a former Monsanto executive and FDA manipulator, Michael Taylor. More recently, the Orwellian labeled Food Safety Enhancement Bill (HR 2749) was passed easily by the House of Representatives.

The bill is on a fast track for Senate and Presidential approval. If it becomes law as written, this combination of a corrupt Food Czar and misleadingly named Food Safety Bill threatens to take out the food that is medicine and leave us with the food that is poison.
...
Some indicate the Bill's language is broad enough to even include home vegetable gardens!

Setting a uniform fee of $500 annual, regardless of company or farm size ...
...
This bill ... gives the FDA the power to have random inspections on any food producing or storage group without probable cause.
...
HR 2749 creates severe criminal and civil penalties, including prison terms of up to 10 years and/or fines of up to $100,000 for each violation. Does it include judicial review, Congressional oversight, a defined and limited set of penalties and punishments for a defined set of "crimes"? Not even. The so called Food Safety Bill hands carte blanch enforcement to the whims of Obama's Food Czar.


Alert: The End of Food as We Know It

I don't trust Obama on this one very much. The last thing we need to do is give the FDA more authority over anything. They have proved to be a corrupt oppressive agency that deserves no authority.




Bettawrekonize -> RE: The FDA and health (9/2/2009 11:53:58 PM)

Pfizer pleads guilty to felony crime in fraudulent marketing of Bextra, pays billions in fines

quote:


But all that changed today with the announcement of a Dept. of Justice criminal case that has resulted in Pfizer pleading guilty to a felony crime.
...
Essentially, Pfizer asked the FDA to approve Bextra for a variety of diseases and conditions, and when the FDA refused those approvals, Pfizer decided to go ahead and market the drugs for those diseases and conditions anyway (off-label marketing).


While the FDA may have disapproved the drug why aren't they protecting the American people from Pfizer breaking the FDA's rules? Why is it the DOJ, instead, is doing so. Shouldn't this be the FDA's job? Or is the FDA too busy going after relatively harmless dietary supplement manufacturers and those who compete with big pharmaceutical corporations instead?


quote:


Pfizer has agreed to pay $1 billion to resolve allegations under the civil False Claims Act that the company illegally promoted four drugs
...
Along with this admission of guilt for committing a felony crime, Pfizer is paying well over $1 billion in criminal fines, plus another $1 billion or so to resolve civil allegations against its fraudulent marketing practices.


Also, someone made a comment I found interesting.

Thomas Frye
quote:


Is there proof that the fines get paid.


This is a good question. Ok, on to the point I want to make.

quote:


And here's the best part: Pfizer's own whistleblowers will cash in! "Six whistleblowers will receive payments totaling more than $102 million from the federal share of the civil recovery," says the DOJ.


Is this really a good thing or will it just encourage a bunch of false whistleblowers. Could it encourage people to conspire to collectively whisteleblow against their corporations and to fabricate false evidence to get money? Or is it a good thing in that it compensates one for potential negative consequences of whistleblowing. Even so, does 102 million seem to overcompensate to the point where that overcompensation creates incentive for false whistelblowing?




Bettawrekonize -> RE: The FDA and health (10/21/2009 8:06:41 PM)

quote:


This meeting and the written comments are intended to help guide FDA in making policy decisions on the promotion of human and animal prescription drugs and biologics and medical devices using the Internet and social media tools.


http://pub.bna.com/eclr/fedreg092109.pdf

Sounds like a scam to stifle any free speech threatening pharmaceutical profits over the Internet.

Also found this interesting.

Scientist, 94, goes after the FDA for misleading trans fat food labels

Scientists Around the World Condemn FDA for Declaring BPA is Safe




Bettawrekonize -> RE: The FDA and health (10/27/2009 11:41:31 PM)

quote:


WASHINGTON -- The Food and Drug Administration is slow to debar health professionals who have been convicted of crimes from doing research for the agency or overseeing the safety of patients in clinical trials, according to a government watchdog report released Thursday.

In one instance, it took the FDA 11 years to debar a doctor who had been convicted of 53 counts of criminal offense for, among other things, bribing an employee to conceal information about the attempted suicide of a clinical-trial patient and prescribing a drug without a license.
...
The FDA is required to disqualify doctors who are convicted of fraud or other crimes. However, it takes the agency an average of four years to strip doctors of their powers, according to a report by the independent Government Accountability Office.


FDA Slow to Debar Doctors Who Commit Crimes, Report Says

But of course we all know that no corruption exists within the FDA.

quote:


A new congressional report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) indicates that the FDA has failed to follow up on unproven drugs that are put on the market through an accelerated approval process, and has no mechanism in place to remove those drugs when they prove to be unsuccessful or dangerous.

The report, which was released this week, looks at a group of 90 drugs approved since 1992 through FDA’s accelerated approval process. The GAO found that although pharmaceutical companies often fail to provide FDA-required post-marketing data which shows that the drugs are working, the FDA has never removed any of the drugs from the market.
FDA Oversight of Unproven Drugs is Lacking: Government Report

Of course none of this could be due to the political influence that pharmaceutical corporations have over the FDA and their employees. That would be impossible, the FDA would never intentionally act against the best interest of the general public.

The problem is that the FDA is too busy going after safer and more effective supplements and natural unpatented remedies (ie: red yeast rice) that would compete with the profit margins of huge pharmaceutical corporations. They don't have time to ensure that no criminals work for the agency or to ensure that patented drugs that make pharmaceutical corporations substantial profits are safe and effective. In fact, for the FDA to have more criminals and less honest people working for it is conducive to its purpose to promote pharmaceutical profit margins even if it's at public expense. This is exactly what the FDA wants, they are unelected and face virtually no accountability whatsoever, what do they care?




Ps103 -> RE: The FDA and health (10/28/2009 2:04:37 PM)

Hey, Betta--you may already have posted this, but I saw it and thought of you.

There is an extremely interesting report under "Medical Devices."

FDA REVIEW




Bettawrekonize -> RE: The FDA and health (11/19/2009 11:54:33 PM)

Senate Exploring Med School Profs Putting Names On Ghostwritten Journal Articles In Favor Of Drugs

and of course the FDA is once again useless when it comes to actually doing something good. Instead, they're too busy taking away our health freedoms by going after anything that may compete with pharmaceuticals.




Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI