Tuesday, September 29, 2009

You might want to think twice about those swine flu shots.

Corporate thuggery is nothing new, but when medical companies do it, we should sit up and take notice - especially when their latest product is being suggested for mandatory requirements. The vast majority of Jews send their kids to public schools or have their children enrolled in sports leagues or other social activities that may end up banning those who refuse to take the swine flu shots. It is important that parents understand every aspect of the politics and money-trail involved in such requirements. Often, the supposed health benefits are few indeed and the "requirement" is simply a smoke screen to conceal the fact that given knowledge of the facts, most people simply would not choose to risk themselves or their children with Big Pharma's products.

NaturalNews.com
Merck employees had "hit list" of doctors they sought to "neutralize", court documents reveal (opinion)
Monday, September 28, 2009
by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Previously secret documents that surfaced at a Vioxx court case in April of this year reveal pharmaceutical giant Merck maintained a "hit list" of doctors to be "neutralized" for speaking out against Vioxx. Although this story was reported on NaturalNews and other sites in April, Merck's involvement in the recent round of swine flu vaccines raises new questions regarding Merck's behavior towards its critics (see below).

As was reported in The Australian, documents that have surfaced in the Federal Court in Melbourne expose the criminal intent of Merck staffers who admitted they intended to "stop funding to institutions" and "interfere with academic appointments." (These actions are highly illegal, by the way.)

According to on-the-record testimony in this Australian trial, one Merck employee said, in referring to the doctors on the hit list, "We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live..."

That sounds a lot like a mob boss ordering a hit on a competing street thug, doesn't it?

At least eight clinical investigators were threatened or intimidated by Merck, the court heard in testimony. This is congruent with the many reports of academic intimidation by Merck that have already been published on NaturalNews.com and other news outlets. The picture of Merck that emerges from these revelations is a company run by thugs who deal with dissent by seeking to destroy the lives and careers of academics who dare to tell the truth about Merck's dangerous drugs.

A culture of criminality
Merck is a company steeped in a culture of criminality. Among its numerous questionable actions, Merck intentionally hid the liver-damaging effects of its cholesterol drug...it intentionally withheld the release of clinical trial data that showed the failures of another cholesterol drug...it has dumped vaccine waste and manufacturing chemicals into the water supply...it set up offshore banking accounts to avoid billions of dollars in U.S. taxes...and it was caught in a massive scheme of scientific fraud when it was revealed that the company used in-house writers to secretly author "independent" studies that were published in peer-reviewed medical journals.

And that's just the beginning of the real story on Merck. Read more astonishing news stories about this company here: http://www.naturalnews.com/merck.html

There's little question that Merck operates from a criminal mentality, resorting to tactics of deception and intimidation to accomplish what it could not achieve through honest means: An increase in sales of its pharmaceutical products...

...Many who speak out against Merck products quickly find their credibility assaulted. If they are in an academic institution, they quickly find their research support drying up, and some end up blackballed by the pharmaceutical industry. What Merck has made perfectly clear over the last several years is that speaking out against Merck's products is academic suicide.

So how are honest scientists or doctors supposed to be able to raise concerns about the swine flu vaccines being manufactured by Merck and other companies? From watching the news, they already know that publicly questioning the safety of this vaccine could cost them their careers.

Is this what modern "science" (if you can call it that) has come to? A band of intimidated, frightened scientists too scared to raise their voices and question the safety of pharmaceutical products? And if so, how can anyone call this "scientific medicine" in the first place? It's more like gunpoint medicine, where you say what you're supposed to say because the big corporate players are holding a (metaphorical) gun to your head.

In terms of the swine flu vaccine itself, Big Pharma is already pumping the mainstream media full of "preemptive defense" stories, claiming that whatever side effects occur from the vaccines would have occurred anyway and the vaccines aren't to blame. Note that this story is being fronted before the vaccine is even in widespread use! They are, in essence, already predicting a wave of nasty side effects and trying to brainwash the American public into dismissing such concerns as mere coincidence.

This is the astonishing, contradictory mindset of Big Pharma: When any harm comes to a patient taking their drugs, that's just coincidence. But if any help comes their way and they see a health improvement, that's always due to the drugs alone, they claim. It is precisely this sort of selective, unscientific thinking that has caused the utter destruction of credibility for the pharmaceutical industry (and of those who push drugs and vaccines). Science has been outright abandoned, replaced with slick marketing, financial arm-twisting and blatant intimidation of anyone who steps outside the lines...

...These revelations about Merck threaten the mythology of modern medicine upon which so many billions of dollars of drug revenues are based. Even doctors don't want to talk much about Merck. Why? Because they realize that as one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, the ethics of Merck reflect on the ethics of western medicine as a whole.

Much of western medicine, after all, is based on pharmaceuticals. And believing that pharmaceuticals make you healthy requires that you also believe the drug companies are acting with integrity and looking out for the welfare of the people. But believing that little piece of mythology requires that the drug companies are believed to be benevolent, compassionate corporations that would never resort to unethical, dirty or illegal tactics to accomplish their aims.

This whole tapestry of pharmaceutical fiction begins to quickly unravel when you begin to see the truth about what really goes on inside Merck -- and that's what we've seen time and time again with previously secret documents that emerged through court cases or other means. The Merck culture is one that most reasonable people would describe as "thuggish" or "criminal" in nature. It has virtually no resemblance to the compassionate image the company tries to peddle through mainstream media advertising.

Besides, if Merck's products are really so good, why would it need to resort to intimidating and threatening researchers in the first place? If its drugs were really so good and so safe, wouldn't the science speak for itself?

Clearly, the intimidation of academics is only necessary when real science turns up answers that you don't want to hear. So intimidation is invoked to replace the science with fear...


Sounds like Merck's been taking lessons from the Chereidi.

UPDATE: NY State workers to be forced to accept vaccination.

Newsday.com
Mandatory flu vaccination splits workers
September 27, 2009 by DELTHIA RICKS / delthia.ricks@newsday.com

The regulation, which was approved in August, comes with a stinging addendum: Get vaccinated or get fired.

But some nurses and many other health care providers say the regulation violates their personal freedom and leaves them vulnerable to vaccine injury. And they cite deaths associated with the last federal government swine-flu vaccination program in 1976...


So their choice, and probably yours, ultimately, will be to either accept a vaccine against a flu that is no more "deadly" than regular seasonal flu and risk killing yourself or your child, or be fired from your job or have you child banned from school. Since there is not a shred of evidence that swine flu is any more dangerous than regular flu, what is the real motive here? A "bailout" for Merck? You should ask.

2 comments:

SJ said...

Are green cars really the answer?

http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE57U02B20090831

Ahavah Gayle said...

The answer to swine flu? Probably not.

To our resource depletion and climate change mess: probably not, either. Giving up cars is the only real answer to that problem.

That's why we're going to crash and burn - because nobody's willing to do it.