Why the FDA should be charged with murder

[donnay]

Why the FDA should be charged with murder

Jon Rappoport
No More Fake News
May 16th, 2014

If you worked for a federal agency that was killing people at the rate of 100,000 a year, every year, like clockwork, and if you knew it, wouldn’t you feel compelled to say or do something about it?

At the FDA, which is, in fact, killing Americans at that rate, no one has ever felt the need to step forward and speak up.

Let’s shift the venue and ask the same question. If you were a medical reporter for a major media outlet in the US, and you knew the above fact, wouldn’t you make it a priority to say something, write something, do something?

I’m talking about people like Sanjay Gupta (CNN, CBS), Gina Kolata (NY Times), Tim Johnson (ABC News), and Thomas Maugh II (LA Times).

And with that, let’s go to the smoking guns. The citation is: BMJ June 7, 2012 (BMJ 2012:344:e3989). Author, Jeanne Lenzer.

Lenzer refers to a report by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices: “It calculated that in 2011 prescription drugs were associated with two to four million people in the US experiencing ‘serious, disabling, or fatal injuries, including 128,000 deaths.’”

The report called this “one of the most significant perils to humans resulting from human activity.”

And here is the final dagger. The report was compiled by outside researchers who went into the FDA’s own database of “serious adverse [medical-drug] events.”

Therefore, to say the FDA isn’t aware of this finding would be absurd. The FDA knows. The FDA knows and it isn’t saying anything about it, because the FDA certifies, as safe and effective, all the medical drugs that are routinely maiming and killing Americans.

Previously, I have documented that the FDA knows; because the FDA has a page on its own website that admits 100,000 people are killed every year by medical drugs, and two million more people are severely injured by the drugs. (Google “FDA Why Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions”)

And for the past five years or so, I have been writing about and citing a published report by the late Dr. Barbara Starfield that indicates 106,000 people in the US are killed by medical drugs every year. Until her death in 2011, Dr. Starfield worked at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. Her report, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, was published in the Journal of American Medical Association on July 26, 2000.

Since the Department of Homeland Security is working its way into every nook and corner of American life, hyper-extending its mandate to protect all of us from everything, why shouldn’t I go along with Janet Napolitano’s advice: see something, say something.

This is what I see and this is what I’m saying. Maybe DHS would like to investigate the FDA as a terrorist organization.

Continued...

 

[eduardo89]

It's a bit hard to charge a non-tangible entity with a murder.

 

[mad cow]

Wow,that might be more than cigarettes,automobiles,bathtubs and ladders combined.

Are you in favor of the drug war?Should these drugs be outlawed like pot?
I think ALL drugs should be available to anybody who wants to buy them from anyone who wants to sell them without prescription,I don't care if the death rate triples as a result.

Outlaw the FDA,don't whine about the drugs,if you don't like them,don't take them.
Freedom can be dangerous,so what else is new?Caveat emptor,I choose Liberty over Security.

 

[donnay]

Wow,that might be more than cigarettes,automobiles,bathtubs and ladders combined.

Are you in favor of the drug war?Should these drugs be outlawed like pot?
I think ALL drugs should be available to anybody who wants to buy them from anyone who wants to sell them without prescription,I don't care if the death rate triples as a result.

Outlaw the FDA,don't whine about the drugs,if you don't like them,don't take them.
Freedom can be dangerous,so what else is new?Caveat emptor,I choose Liberty over Security.

How 'bout reading the entire article.

 

[mad cow]

How 'bout reading the entire article. :roll eyes:

I read the entire article,here is the last paragraph:

Here is the situation. No medical drug in the US can be released for public use unless and until the FDA says it is safe and effective. That’s the rule. The FDA is spitting out drug approvals month after month and year after year, and the drugs are routinely killing 100,000 people a year and maiming two million more, which adds up to a million deaths per decade and 20 million maimings per decade. The FDA and the federal government are doing nothing about it, even though they know what’s going on. This is mass murder. Not accidental death. Murder. A holocaust.

Does that sound like someone who wants more Federal rules,regulations and involvement in what we are allowed to put in our bodies,or less?

 

[donnay]

I read the entire article,here is the last paragraph:

Does that sound like someone who wants more Federal rules,regulations and involvement in what we are allowed to put in our bodies,or less?

No not at all.

Here is the situation. No medical drug in the US can be released for public use unless and until the FDA says it is safe and effective. That’s the rule. The FDA is spitting out drug approvals month after month and year after year, and the drugs are routinely killing 100,000 people a year and maiming two million more, which adds up to a million deaths per decade and 20 million maimings per decade.

That's the rule...there is NO ACCOUNTABILITY for them. Drug companies literally get a pass, time after time or a slap on the wrist.

 

[mad cow]

No not at all.



That's the rule...there is NO ACCOUNTABILITY for them. Drug companies literally get a pass, time after time or a slap on the wrist.

They should get a pass 100% of the time since the FDA shouldn't exist.

There should be no accountability,barring laws against fraud,if they claim their drug cures baldness in every case,it would be fraud if it didn't.Laws against fraud have been around for hundreds of years and I support them.

It costs drug companies hundreds of millions of dollars to get a drug approved by the FDA,pretty big wrists even before any fines,and the author apparently wants to make this process even more difficult and expensive.

Here is the situation. No medical drug in the US can be released for public use unless and until the FDA says it is safe and effective. That’s the rule

.No,that's the problem.

 

[Zippyjuan]

We should shut down all food manufactures and gun makers for the same reasons.

Or we should get rid of the FDA and let companies sell whatever they want to without caring if they work or if somebody dies taking their products.

 

[donnay]

They should get a pass 100% of the time since the FDA shouldn't exist.

There should be no accountability,barring laws against fraud,if they claim their drug cures baldness in every case,it would be fraud if it didn't.Laws against fraud have been around for hundreds of years and I support them.

It costs drug companies hundreds of millions of dollars to get a drug approved by the FDA,pretty big wrists even before any fines,and the author apparently wants to make this process even more difficult and expensive.

.No,that's the problem.

The FDA colludes with many of the Drug Companies. I agree the FDA should have no jurisdiction on anything. However, they allow drug companies to solicit their drugs and, in many cases, with deliberate flawed studies. How come Merck, the makers of Vioxx aren't bankrupted and out-of-business? They deceitfully withheld crucial information of the dangers of that drug to the public--isn't that fraud? 60,000 people died because the FDA allowed this drug on the market. I am all for getting rid of the FDA, but until then you have to learn to read between the lines.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

We should shut down all food manufactures and gun makers for the same reasons.

Or we should get rid of the FDA and let companies sell whatever they want to without caring if they work or if somebody dies taking their products.

What? What does the FDA manufacture?

Gun's that aren't safe don't sell very well.

 

[tod evans]

$4.36B in 2012

Bad investment, fire the lot of 'em.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Murder is a deliberate act. Saying the FDA intended to kill people means that they (the FDA) want medicines which kill people yet the actual incidence of death in people who use medicines properly (according to recommended doses) are pretty rare. Most medicine deaths are from people abusing or misusing them- not from people taking them at proper doses.

A couple questions.
1) Does the FDA say that all drugs are free of complications or risks? No. Possible risks, including the rare chance of death are listed as a warning. If they said there was absolutely no risk and there were risks, then you could get them for being negligent.

2) Did they produce the product or cause the user to use the product in a way which is likely to cause death? No.

 

[donnay]

Okay accomplices to murder then. If they are there to assume the position of safety then they are derelict in their duty.

 

[Zippyjuan]

On what grounds? They did not make any product. They did not promise that nothing bad will happen if you use a product. Nothing is 100% safe in all uses. People have even died using the internet (obsessive users who did not eat or drink for days but stayed online).

 

[donnay]

On what grounds? They did not make any product. They did not promise that nothing bad will happen if you use a product. Nothing is 100% safe in all uses. People have even died using the internet (obsessive users who did not eat or drink for days but stayed online).

I already said, dereliction of duty. Because they give the impression to people that they are there for their safety when they are not.

Personally, I would like to see them go away but first lets make an example of them. Without them, the drug companies have no enforcer.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Interesting. Drugs would be safer if companies making them don't have to test them or prove any safety before selling them to the public. I would disagree with that idea.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Interesting. Drugs would be safer if companies making them don't have to test them or prove any safety before selling them to the public. I would disagree with that idea.

Is someone saying that commercial drugs shouldn't be tested?

A company may want to test them so that they know the effects and that they won't get sued (or worse) if they make claims that aren't valid or if they cause harm.

Are there any protections built into the current system?

 

[donnay]

Interesting. Drugs would be safer if companies making them don't have to test them or prove any safety before selling them to the public. I would disagree with that idea.

As it stands now, the drug companies test them and bury all the bad information found. Then they hand over their so-called studies to the FDA which grants them permission to sell the drug. When people die, it's the illusion that the FDA steps in and does something about it. When in actuality it's not until there is a class-action lawsuit brought against the drug makers that the FDA can no longer ignore.

 

[Zippyjuan]

How does getting rid of any oversight improve on that? Then they won't have to do any testing at all before releasing drugs which could be deadly or have major serious side effects. The FDA system isn't perfect (there is no such system) but it does catch a lot of potential problems.

 

[donnay]

How does getting rid of any oversight improve on that? Then they won't have to do any testing at all before releasing drugs which could be deadly or have major serious side effects. The FDA system isn't perfect (there is no such system) but it does catch a lot of potential problems.

Allow the free market to work. It they put out a drug that says it does something and it doesn't they are libel for putting out false claims.