SECOND HAND SMOKE STUDIES CONTESTED BY A TEXAN PHYSICIAN / LES ÉTUDES SUR LA FUMÉE PASSIVE CONTESTÉES PAR UN MÉDECIN TEXAN

FRANÇAIS À SUIVRE

Some truth about the flawed environmental tobacco smoke studies and the vested pharmaceutical interests that command them surfaced in a hearing in Muncee, Ind where local tavern owners, fraternal organizations and a chain of tobacco stores are challenging the local smoking bans.  The key testimony was delivered by Dr. John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D. Read more about him here.

Will it be enough to win this particular case? We will just have to wait and see but either way it will hopefully encourage other doctors and scientists to join those who are already denouncing the flawed science behind pharmaceutical funded scientists, activists and studies.

Doctor says smoke findings faulty

Studies under fire as smoking-ban trial concludes

The comments in both articles are also a must read.

Muncie (Indiana-Comté du Delaware)  - Un médecin texan, à la faveur d'un témoignage devant un tribunal, a déclaré jeudi que les conclusions du Surgeon General publiées en 2006 sur les dangers de la "fumée passive" se fondaient sur une science erronée.

Lire l’histoire ici :  Un médecin américain conteste les dangers de la "fumée passive"

AMENDE DE 70 MILLIONS - DE LA PETITE MONNAIE POUR JOHNSON & JOHNSON !

Johnson & Johnson, a accepté de payer une amende de 70 millions de dollars aux autorités américaines pour mettre fin à des accusations de corruption.

En effet, J & J a été accusé d’avoir payé des pots-de-vin à des médecins grecs, roumains et polonais pour favoriser les produits J & J lors des traitements de leurs patients, ainsi que des commissions en Irak pour obtenir illégalement des contrats.  Ne nous ne leurrons surtout pas que ceci n'arrive qu'ailleurs.  Ceci arrive partout dans le monde où l'industrie pharmaceutique a une grande emprise sur la médecine et la science. Bien sûr que les preuves ne sont pas toujours aussi flagrantes, mais les manigances sont tout de même semblables et même tout à fait pareilles partout.

Dans le monde de l'industrie du médicament, une amende comme celle-ci fait tout naturellement partie du coût inhérent des tactiques de marketing, peu importe combien immorales, illégales et dangereuses des telles tactiques peuvent être pour la santé publique. En règle générale les géants pharmaceutiques paient leur amende et recommencent le même stratagème à répétition. Que vaut un pauvre 70 millions pour une compagnie comme J & J qui, il n’y a pas tellement longtemps, a déboursé 16,6 milliards de dollars pour acheter la division des produits sans ordonnance de Pfizer Inc., qui est constituée des marques telles que Listerine®, Nicorette®, Rolaids®, Sudafed®, Benadryl® et Visine®? Pour avoir déboursé un tel montant pour son acquisition, cela doit être vachement payant le médicament sans ordonnance !  Imaginons maintenant combien que le médicament breveté rapporte même après les coûts inhérents à sa mise en marché, comme les amendes entre autres. 


Et les médecins corrompus dans tout cela? Quelle sera leur punition? Ils vont sûrement recevoir une petite tape sur la main et continueront de pratiquer comme si de rien n'était. !

Il est clair que le besoin est criant pour que nos élus dénoncent des telles pratiques malhonnêtes et illégales et infligent des punitions sévères à quiconque s’y adonne. Assez d’une industrie pharmaceutique immorale et gourmande qui infiltre nos universités et organismes publiques et qui souvent profite des recherches qui se font avec l’argent des payeurs de taxes. Assez des médecins pervertis et opportunistes. Assez le lobbying intense pour l’évaluation et le brevet rapide de nouveaux médicaments qui ressemblent drôlement à leurs prédécesseurs et qui parfois ont des effets beaucoup plus néfastes mais qui coûtent plusieurs fois le prix ( Lire La question des brevets sur les produits pharmaceutiques). Seulement lorsque nos élus trouveront le courage de faire le grand ménage de toutes ces manigances, que la santé publique se portera beaucoup mieux autant médicalement que financièrement.

USA: J&J paye une amende de 70M$

TRUTH IS FINALLY SURFACING IN NONE LESS THAN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

After years of trying to get some mainstream media reporters to investigate the issue, it is heartening to see that someone is finally digging deeper into the Pharmaceutical interests of smoking bans.

Kudos to the authors Jane Zhang and Brody Mills for an honest article on pharma's direct and through the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation funding towards implementing smoking bans to boost their profits. Kudos to the Wall Street Journal for publishing the article. We certainly hope this will motivate more reporters to dig deeper as there is a lot more to bring to light!

Please take the time to drop a note to Jane Zhang and Brody Mills to thank them for their honest work at: Jane.Zhang@wsj.com and brody.mullins@wsj.com .

Excerpts from the article: Nomination Tests Antilobbyist Policy . Please take the time to read the whole article because it is an excellent read.

The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids has received millions of dollars from pharmaceutical companies that would benefit from the organization's work to reduce smoking because they sell products that help people quit, such as Nicorette gum and NicoDerm patches.

(…)In the past five years, the drug industry has contributed $3.3 million, amounting to 3.2% of the Campaign's funding, said spokesman Vince Willmore.

Most of the money was donated by GlaxoSmithKline PLC, which has contributed nearly $3 million since 2004, according to Campaign records.

Pfizer Inc. donated $385,000 since 2007 and Johnson & Johnson gave $50,000 for an award in 2008 and 2009.

The Campaign was founded in 1996 to take on the tobacco industry. Its first grant came from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the nonprofit established with the personal fortune of Robert Wood Johnson, who helped build Johnson & Johnson. The foundation, a large shareholder of J&J stock, is the Campaign's biggest contributor, donating more than $85 million since its founding.

What is brought to light in this article is only the tip of the iceberg. There are billions of dollars being funneled through foundations and non-profits into the smoking bans and into the increase of tobacco taxation worldwide to profit the bottom line of the pharma industry. You can find extensive research on the issue at: http://www.rwjf.org/portfolios/grantlist.jsp?iaid=143&gsa=1 and many other links on the same blog http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

The e-cigarette is a relatively new invention that delivers nicotine to its user without the combustion of tobacco while mimicking the ritual smokers find so hard to break. It offers the option to continue smoking so to speak, without incommodating by-standers who may be annoyed, intolerant, or afraid of second hand smoke and prevents its users from inhaling what public health qualifies as toxic fumes.

While tobacco remains a legal product no matter how hazardous they claim it is to health and some have pushed the paranoia to the point that even miniscule residues of smoke are now such a menace that at least one hospital has banned smokers (not smoking) from a maternity waiting room, there is increasing talk of the e-cigarette being outlawed.

You see, the problem is that this promising invention that offers an alternative solution to smoking and the smoking bans, is not marketed by Big Pharma. Smoking bans who have been fiinanced in terms of millions by pharmaceutical interests such as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, are a gold mine to the pharmaceutical industry who market patches, inhalers, gums and killer drugs such as Chantix and anything that might even remotely compete with such products must be eliminated pronto! Legislators are undoubtedly agressively lobbied by Big Pharma to quickly make the e-cigarette illegal. While researchers are generously funded to produce anti-tobacco studies as the need arises, the WHO or other public health authorities do not seem to be too anxious to order a study on e-cigarettes albeit they are supposedly waiting for such studies before ruling on the future of e-cigarettes. They are relying on the makers of the e-cigarette to order such studies, as if they will put any credence into what their findings might be. Since Big Pharma increasingly advertizes gum and inhalers as a substitute when you can’t smoke (due to the smoking bans), you can imagine the hole e-cigarette will dig in their profits if it becomes popular because it is much more satisfying to smokers as many who have tried it claim.

Our corrupt and/or naive legislators and public health officials obviously believe that the same nicotine is healthy if delivered by a pharmaceutical company and dangerous if delivered by anyone else. We are amazed at how many pharmaceutical substitutes are not only government approved but even reimbursed in many cases even though some products are proven to be quite dangerous, such as Chantix which causes serious side effects including suicide. Medical and public health authorities profess that even something like Chantix is still better than smoking. Yet according to their contradictory logic, e-cigarettes are not better than smoking? Are they more dangerous than Chantix? What’s wrong with this picture?

Watch a news segment in the cleanairquality.blogspot

Read: Senator seeks to halt sales of 'e-cigarettes'

MORE ON CHILDHOOD OBESITY MYTHS

We came across this dated but more apropos than ever public comment prepared by Sandy Szwarc for the FTC/HHS Workshop in 2005. It is rich with references to studies that find that except for extreme cases of obesity, children can lead healthy and happy lives regardless of their weight.

Much like we have commented on October 12th, low BMI is not necessarily a synonym of good health. You will find that many references in Ms Szwarc’s comments are in line with the study we referenced on our FOLLOW THE MONEY BEHIND THE OBESITY ‘’DISEASE’’ comment. The irony of this particular study is that the actual research was likely attempting to find the complete opposite results because even the concluding remarks tend to tip the scale to the side of the rhetoric that children must be lean to enjoy good health, when in fact their own findings support that children can improve their health through moderate exercise even if they don’t lose weight.

Similar to our line of thinking, Ms Szwarc concurs that exaggerated public health and corporate campaigns against obesity are far more damaging to the psychological and physical health of our children and young adolescents.

Public Comment on Childhood Obesity Initiatives

FOLLOW THE MONEY BEHIND THE OBESITY ‘’DISEASE’’

Is obesity a disease? We refer you to an excellent analysis on the issue as published in the International Journal of Obesity .

Real life observations and many studies including the latest one that found that overweight and obese children can improve their health even if they don’t lose weight, make of us firm believers that obesity is increasingly being qualified as a disease for the only purpose of serving corporate agendas.

This dated article (hot links no longer function) in the Center for Consumer Freedom website, gives us the history of how Medicare in the U.S. has agreed to recognize obesity as a disease and the key players that persistently lobbied government in that direction.

One of the key players lobbying was the American Obesity Association (AOA), a pressure group heavily funded by pharmaceutical and other connex corporate interests. From their own website we can read the following:

AOA is a non-profit tax-exempt educational and advocacy organization with approximately five hundred members, both professional and lay. Our financial support comes principally from pharmaceutical research and development companies as well as other companies in the weight management field including Abbott, Amylin, Aventis, Bristol Myers-Squibb, Ethicon-Endo Surgery, Eli Lilly, Glaxo Smith-Kline, Pfizer, Merck, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi-Synthelabo, Weight Watchers Intl. Inc. and Wellspring Camps. I also serve as a consultant to the American Society for Bariatric Surgery and as a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of Ethicon Endo-Surgery Inc.

But similar to the smoking issue, the most influential player in the creation of the obesity hype seems to be none other than the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the charitable branch of Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceuticals who much like they did with the anti-smoking campaign for the last decade, they are funding in the order of millions the anti-obesity campaign which more than serves the bottom profit of their corporate affiliations. Read: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Announces $500 Million Commitment to Reverse Childhood Obesity in U.S.

In partnership with the American Heart Association, they released a joint report on the obesity epidemic in the U.S.A.: A Nation at Risk – Obesity in the United States

There are many more instrumental players causing our children to be stigmatized as ‘’sick fatsos’’ in schools and society in general, albeit they are perfectly healthy and lead happy fulfilling childhood lives and a google search will yield more results than is required to convince you if you read the findings with a critical mind.

And by the way, the next time your pediatrician suggests that your child is sick because he’s over the ‘’ideal’’ limit these alleged do-gooders have set for your child, ask him/her to do some research and use some critical thinking him/herself before suggesting diets or treatment that can cause more psychological and emotional trauma to your child than the few extra pounds he may be healthily and cheerfully carrying around!