News

Articles
Topics
Q&A

Torrent(Info)
Magnet

Recipes at healthfully.ai
Mirror at aajon.us

Create an Article


                       Do We Believe Medical Studies?

===========================================================================

If most published medical studies are biased and/or corrupt, why do we
still believe them? Over the last decade, investigational studies found
that doctors who participated in pharmaceutical-company-sponsored drug
trials more often prescribed that company's drugs, and that clinical
trials funded by pharma companies more often reported favorably for
the drug. Many "scientists" failed to disclose their financial ties
to the pharmaceutical industry and wrote biased and/or junk scientific
determinations of trials that were published. In an attempt to harness
such corruption, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)
made its conflict-of-interest policy more stringent.[1] However, with
the many ways to hide financial transactions, it is not likely to stop
much of the medical/pharma corruption.

JAMA's tougher policy seems to be a responsive twitch to the news that
13 authors of a published scientific paper about an antidepressant were
paid by the manufacturer. The article stressed adverse health effects
on pregnant women who stopped taking the antidepressant. The lead author
received funding from at least eight pharma companies. That was just one
of many conflicts of interest that had been an issue for articles in JAMA.

Considering that all drugs are non-biochemical constructions of laboratory
chemicals, they all create side effects, usually long-term as well as
short. Consider that all hormone and hormone replacement drugs are made
of laboratory chemicals. The so- called natural hormones are not natural
at all. They have no relationship to hormones in our bodies. At best,
the so-called natural hormones are made from hydrogenated vegetable oils
that have the same molecular structure as plastic, and from chemically
treated proteins, such as from soy. The only thing that was natural about
them is that some of the ingredients were derived from food. However,
after processing, they are far from natural and nothing is left but
chemicals of varying toxicity.

If we intend to remain as naturally healthy with optimal functions until
natural death, theoretically, the only way is to treat the body the way
that it has maintained itself for most of the last 4 millions years by
eating raw, without industrial chemicals.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 1. Journal of the American Medical Association July 12, 2006;
     296(2): 220-221.