5 Examples of Slow or Shady Science

If you struggle with new ideas, have you researched cognitive dissonance? Science is pretty funny, let us revisit a few things…

1. Infections in laboring women (puerperal sepsis, “childbed fever”) used to be rampant in hospitals, so much so that women would rather birth in the streets. A doctor researched the differences between birthing in areas of low postpartum infection and high postpartum infection. He discovered handwashing would prevent mothers from dying. This practice, simple handwashing, took OVER TWENTY YEARS to come to light. That doctor (Ignaz Semmelweis) was ridiculed and pushed out of medicine. I am serious. He was also beaten to death in a mental asylum, though the facts surrounding that are suspect.

2. Smoking used to be touted as good for health! Doctors used to promote smoking, a majority smoked themselves. Scientists started to uncover the harms of tobacco and the first study was published in 1939. The tobacco industry struck back by funding fake science to promote their products. It took 26 YEARS for health warnings to be administered by the Surgeon General about the risks of smoking. Funding science from conflicts of interest did not end with tobacco products; other entities now manipulate research and saturate the market with false science.

3a. Dr. Marcia Angell, former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, the most respected medical journal, stated that clinical research is steeped in conflicts of interest and people are paid to sway studies for the benefit of large pharmaceutical companies.

3b. Dr. Richard Horton, current Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet, another highly respected medical journal, states that half of the science is UNTRUE. Half! Studies are falsified, controls are used to influence outcomes, and we can no longer take them at face value as there are heavy conflicts of interests straight from drug manufacturers who fund these studies.

3c. Former Director of National Institutes of Health, Dr. Bernadine Healy, constantly dealt with science fraud and even stated that not looking into something because of pressures from industry should throw red flags, yet this is happening. At the very end of this clip, she speaks on a statement from the IOM that discourages research. The Institutes of Medicine have issued warnings of looking into matters because they are afraid of what it will show. These are topics that influence our children!

4. A senior vaccine safety research scientist within the Centers for Disease Control holds whistleblower status. Dr. William Thompson tried to uncover the fraud with the creation and efficacy studies for the MMR vaccine. He has to have permission from the Director of the CDC to testify, he has still not been granted permission. Surprised?

5. ALL infant vaccines state in section 13.1 of the insert that “[vaccine name] has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility.” This is not studied. We put these biologics into newborns fresh from the womb and every two-three months up to their first birthday and beyond. These things are not studied, and yet we tout them as “safe and effective.” Infants double their birth weight by six months of age and triple their birth weight by their first birthday. This is a period of rapid growth and development, wouldn’t it be keen to have studies performed on carcinogenic or mutagenic potentials at the VERY least?

Cognitive dissonance is real and Semmelweis reflex happens today. We need to partner with providers within our community to lead and support us to better health practices. It is up to parents to question current practices as they see changes in their children (or their friends/family). Medical professionals are busy, but need to make research a priority. They may need a vaccine insert given to them directly with the plea of a concerned parent. There are physicians that are changing the course of healthcare for our children, they are starting to see problems. Informed consent must be protected and touted as the bare minimum, and we need to keep providers accountable. Healthcare practitioners are charged to give true informed consent, constantly weighing risks versus benefits. Downplaying risks or negating them all together is not true informed consent: it is an agenda.

Shalom, light, and love.

 

Sites to Consider:
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/01/12/375663920/the-doctor-who-championed-hand-washing-and-saved-women-s-lives
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1470496/
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/21/2/87
NEJM editor: “No longer possible to believe much of clinical research published”
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/05/16/editor-in-chief-of-worlds-best-known-medical-journal-half-of-all-the-literature-is-false/
https://www.acsh.org/news/2015/05/19/science-publication-is-hopelessly-compromised-say-journal-editors
List of vaccine inserts: http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s