As Disbarred Probert would say ... prescribing doctors MURDERED 2000 PEOPLE!

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:m%MNf.589076$084.377163@attbi_s22...

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:drHNf.797613$x96.409829@attbi_s72...

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about
how the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers
involved, I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to
me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the
course of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments they
wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally
prosecuted, I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional
chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe" "all
natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated them,
and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal
prosecution is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and
affirmed by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven to
be utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx
and Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be related
been as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above the
label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would make
it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs. What's
sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is
being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to
demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop
such a blinded venom for others as you have?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.


From the AMA, AHA, ADA
19.1% of all deaths in diseases are due to doctors' prescribing. That's
a start.

A start with what? Prescribing errors? Or does this include adverse
reactions, etc.? How many of people would have died without
prescriptions? I think that sort of quantitation is nearly if not
completely impossible to accurately assess and the people that throw those
percentages around (no offense to you as I find you a reasonable poster
even if I do disagree with most everything) are being reckless and
possibly dangerous.

Also, you have to take into account that in an argument, 87.3% of all
statistics are made up on the spot.
--


--Rich

Recommended websites:

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
http://www.acahf.org.au
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.csicop.org/

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:m%MNf.589076$084.377163@attbi_s22...

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:drHNf.797613$x96.409829@attbi_s72...

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit
an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about
how the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers
involved, I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to
me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the
course of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments they
wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally
prosecuted, I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional
chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe"
"all natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated
them, and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal
prosecution is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and
affirmed by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven to
be utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx
and Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be related
been as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above
the label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would make
it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to
show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs. What's
sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating
the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is
being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies
should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to
demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign
off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop
such a blinded venom for others as you have?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.


From the AMA, AHA, ADA
19.1% of all deaths in diseases are due to doctors' prescribing. That's
a start.

A start with what? Prescribing errors? Or does this include adverse
reactions, etc.? How many of people would have died without
prescriptions? I think that sort of quantitation is nearly if not
completely impossible to accurately assess and the people that throw
those percentages around (no offense to you as I find you a reasonable
poster even if I do disagree with most everything) are being reckless and
possibly dangerous.

19.1% due to flat out error. The unexpected adverse reactions are aside
from that.

People? throw these numbers out? Do you actually think that these medical
associations are overstating?

THEIR assessment was that THEY need to be more careful and insist on
better education of each other.

That's to their credit.

I'm not suggesting counter numbers. I'm not suggesting medical errors are
not a huge problem. What I'm saying is that I don't find it reasonable to
attach a number to it. I could be 19%. It could be less. It could be
more. I've seen some of the studies done attempting to quantitate medical
errors. They're so fraught with inadequacies I not only find them hollow,
but I'm embarrassed for the journals that publish them.

"Rich" wrote in message
...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:m%MNf.589076$084.377163@attbi_s22...

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:drHNf.797613$x96.409829@attbi_s72...

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit
an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about
how the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers
involved, I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to
me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the
course of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments they
wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally
prosecuted, I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional
chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe"
"all natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated
them, and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal
prosecution is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and
affirmed by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven to
be utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx
and Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be related
been as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above
the label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would make
it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to
show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs. What's
sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating
the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is
being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies
should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to
demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign
off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop
such a blinded venom for others as you have?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.


From the AMA, AHA, ADA
19.1% of all deaths in diseases are due to doctors' prescribing. That's
a start.

A start with what? Prescribing errors? Or does this include adverse
reactions, etc.? How many of people would have died without
prescriptions? I think that sort of quantitation is nearly if not
completely impossible to accurately assess and the people that throw
those percentages around (no offense to you as I find you a reasonable
poster even if I do disagree with most everything) are being reckless and
possibly dangerous.

Also, you have to take into account that in an argument, 87.3% of all
statistics are made up on the spot.

I hear you - statistics can be manipulated to say virtually anything you wan
them to (cover your ears Herman!). I see people die given my profession.
Based on personal experience, I don't see any way that one fifth of all
deaths are due to prescribing errors.

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:ICNNf.1569$oL.1084@attbi_s71...

"Rich" wrote in message
...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:m%MNf.589076$084.377163@attbi_s22...

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:drHNf.797613$x96.409829@attbi_s72...

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit
an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about
how the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers
involved, I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to
me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the
course of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments
they wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally
prosecuted, I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional
chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe"
"all natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated
them, and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal
prosecution is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and
affirmed by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven to
be utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx
and Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be related
been as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above
the label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that
the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would
make it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to
show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs.
What's sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating
the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is
being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies
should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to
demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign
off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop
such a blinded venom for others as you have?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.


From the AMA, AHA, ADA
19.1% of all deaths in diseases are due to doctors' prescribing.
That's a start.

A start with what? Prescribing errors? Or does this include adverse
reactions, etc.? How many of people would have died without
prescriptions? I think that sort of quantitation is nearly if not
completely impossible to accurately assess and the people that throw
those percentages around (no offense to you as I find you a reasonable
poster even if I do disagree with most everything) are being reckless
and possibly dangerous.

Also, you have to take into account that in an argument, 87.3% of all
statistics are made up on the spot.

I hear you - statistics can be manipulated to say virtually anything you
wan them to (cover your ears Herman!). I see people die given my
profession. Based on personal experience, I don't see any way that one
fifth of all deaths are due to prescribing errors.

I have a friend who is in end-stage emphysema. He has been taking prednisone
for 13 years now, and the drug's side effects are devastating. When he dies,
the prednisone will probably have contributed to the cause of death (most
likely by reducing his resistance to pneumonia). But, on balance, he
probably would have suffocated from his emphysema eight or ten years ago
were it not for the steroid. Damned if you do and . . .
--


--Rich

Recommended websites:

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
http://www.acahf.org.au
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.csicop.org/

Skeptic wrote:
"PeterB" wrote in message
ps.com...

Skeptic wrote:
"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about
how
the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers
involved,
I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to
me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the
course
of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments they
wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally
prosecuted,
I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional
chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe" "all
natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated them,
and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal
prosecution
is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and
affirmed
by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven to
be
utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx
and
Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting
them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be related
been
as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above the
label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would make
it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs. What's
sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is
being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to
demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop such
a
blinded venom for others as you have?

Your defense of those who commoditize disease for profit makes you a
criminal. How does that feel, exactly?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.

Does this mean you know you need more sex? As for me being criminal, I
laugh in your general direction and bid you farewell, troll.

You should be laughing at your inability to write.

PeterB

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:ICNNf.1569$oL.1084@attbi_s71...

"Rich" wrote in message
...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:m%MNf.589076$084.377163@attbi_s22...

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:drHNf.797613$x96.409829@attbi_s72...

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit
an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about
how the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers
involved, I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to
me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the
course of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments
they wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally
prosecuted, I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional
chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe"
"all natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated
them, and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal
prosecution is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and
affirmed by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven to
be utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx
and Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be related
been as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above
the label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that
the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would
make it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to
show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs.
What's sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating
the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is
being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies
should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to
demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign
off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop
such a blinded venom for others as you have?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.


From the AMA, AHA, ADA
19.1% of all deaths in diseases are due to doctors' prescribing.
That's a start.

A start with what? Prescribing errors? Or does this include adverse
reactions, etc.? How many of people would have died without
prescriptions? I think that sort of quantitation is nearly if not
completely impossible to accurately assess and the people that throw
those percentages around (no offense to you as I find you a reasonable
poster even if I do disagree with most everything) are being reckless
and possibly dangerous.

Also, you have to take into account that in an argument, 87.3% of all
statistics are made up on the spot.

I hear you - statistics can be manipulated to say virtually anything you
wan them to (cover your ears Herman!). I see people die given my
profession. Based on personal experience, I don't see any way that one
fifth of all deaths are due to prescribing errors.

Well, qualified and concerned physicians do. They don't wear blinders and
say, "Not us".
They, the concerned ones, who want to improve say it is THEIR fault.
I'm talking about the kingpins in their profession, not notoriety gleaning
people. They run research labs AND treat people. They are concerned and
don't fluff it off.

vernon wrote:
"PeterB" wrote in message
ups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about how the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers involved, I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the course of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments they wish.
If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally prosecuted, I
base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe" "all
natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated them, and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal prosecution is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and affirmed by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven to be
utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx and
Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and prosecuting
them
for anything is absurd.

speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be related been
as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above the
label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.



I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would make it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs. What's sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is being
done. Why don't you champion that?

PeterB


It's a trade off. Life shortening effects of some prescription drugs in some
applications. The disease may kill in 5 years and the drug in 10. Also
MANY would rather die quicker but out of pain.

Actually, it's the other way around. Very few people live more than a
few additional weeks or months by taking a drug, while many more people
taking those same drugs experience life-threatening complications,
disabling side effects, and early death. The attrition due to this
effect means the risk-reward benefit from drugs is in favor of doing
nothing when compared to relying on prescription meds. Of course,
natural medicine would effectively treat and even reverse most disease
in the modern world.

PeterB

In article om,
vernon wrote:

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:drHNf.797613$x96.409829@attbi_s72...

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about how
the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers involved,
I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the course
of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments they
wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally prosecuted,
I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe" "all
natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated them,
and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal prosecution
is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and affirmed
by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven to be
utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx and
Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be related
been as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above the
label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would make it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs. What's
sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop such
a blinded venom for others as you have?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.


From the AMA, AHA, ADA
19.1% of all deaths in diseases are due to doctors' prescribing. That's a
start.

19.1%? What a lovely figure. Looks nice and precise. It's crap.
You have no source for it. You never do.

Approx. 110,000 deaths due to misapplication of treatment by Doctors and
hospitals, EVERY YEAR.

Oh, so you're going to try to use Lazarou et al's figure of 106,000?
It's still garbage.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:ICNNf.1569$oL.1084@attbi_s71...

"Rich" wrote in message
...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:m%MNf.589076$084.377163@attbi_s22...

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:drHNf.797613$x96.409829@attbi_s72...

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit
an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these
meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about
how the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers
involved, I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to
me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the
course of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments
they wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally
prosecuted, I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective
in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional
chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe"
"all natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated
them, and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal
prosecution is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and
affirmed by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven
to be utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx
and Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be
related been as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above
the label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that
the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had
a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would
make it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to
show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs.
What's sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating
the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is
being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies
should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to
demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign
off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop
such a blinded venom for others as you have?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.


From the AMA, AHA, ADA
19.1% of all deaths in diseases are due to doctors' prescribing.
That's a start.

A start with what? Prescribing errors? Or does this include adverse
reactions, etc.? How many of people would have died without
prescriptions? I think that sort of quantitation is nearly if not
completely impossible to accurately assess and the people that throw
those percentages around (no offense to you as I find you a reasonable
poster even if I do disagree with most everything) are being reckless
and possibly dangerous.

Also, you have to take into account that in an argument, 87.3% of all
statistics are made up on the spot.

I hear you - statistics can be manipulated to say virtually anything you
wan them to (cover your ears Herman!). I see people die given my
profession. Based on personal experience, I don't see any way that one
fifth of all deaths are due to prescribing errors.

Well, qualified and concerned physicians do. They don't wear blinders and
say, "Not us".
They, the concerned ones, who want to improve say it is THEIR fault.
I'm talking about the kingpins in their profession, not notoriety gleaning
people. They run research labs AND treat people. They are concerned and
don't fluff it off.

Your implication is rather unflattering.... I think most, in fact the
overwhelming majority of docs, care. We are concerned about upholding our
first and most sacred rule of do no harm. Leaving that alone for now, as
I'm sure you weren't intending to take some personal jabs, the issue is how
to quantify. In every profession there are alarmists and there are those
who are too laid back. It's not wearing blinders to be skeptical that a
fifth of all deaths in the US are caused by prescription errors... it's good
common sense. That would be an extraordinary claim which would require
extraordinary proof - of which there is none.

Skeptic wrote:
"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:ICNNf.1569$oL.1084@attbi_s71...

"Rich" wrote in message
...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:m%MNf.589076$084.377163@attbi_s22...

"vernon" wrote in message
ng.com...

"Skeptic" wrote in message
news:drHNf.797613$x96.409829@attbi_s72...

"PeterB" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Skeptic wrote:
"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
Ilena Rose wrote:
Probert screams MURDERER when
someone dies after con-med has failed them ... and they visit
an
alternative medical practitioner and later die.

To use his ILL LOGIC ... the doctors who prescribed these
meds
MURDERED their patients and should be tried as such.
When the Vioxx news broke, and the media carried stories about
how the
manufacturer covered up information regarding the dangers
involved, I
called for a criminal investigation. Sadly, no one listened to
me.

When conventional medicine has not been able to reverse the
course of
cancer, people should be free to choose whatever treatments
they wish. If
they choose something like Laetrile, they should be given full
disclosure
as to the results of scientific tests.

When I claim that Laetrile pushers should be criminally
prosecuted, I base
it on several facts:

No clinical study has ever shown that Laetrile is effective
in
treating any form of cancer.

There are those people who are afraid of conventional
chemotherapy
and radiation therapy, and will fore go those treatments for
alternatives,
since the alternatives, notably Laetrile, claim to be "safe"
"all natural"
"no side effects", etc.

These pushers are well aware of the facts as I have stated
them, and
they continue to push their potions of death.

It is this precise set of circumstances where criminal
prosecution is
warranted.

In the case of Vioxx, and now Darvon, the medications do have
significant
medical usage which was proven by scientific testing, and
affirmed by
those who finally found relief from chronic pain. That clearly
distinguishes them from Laetrile, which has only been proven
to be utterly
useless.

The individual medical practitioners who have prescribed Vioxx
and Darvon
did not have the knowledge that there was a problem, and
prosecuting them
for anything is absurd.
speaking of vioxx - have any of the deaths alleged to be
related been as a
result of taking therapeutic doses? I seem to recall the early
information
suggested the doses associated with it tended to be well above
the label's
recommendation, as in treating refractory arthritis, etc.


I have not followed the gritty nitty on this carefully. The most
recent
case to go to verdict found no liability, but, it appears that
the
deceased had been only taking it for 30 days, or so, and he had
a
substantial pre-existing cardiac history. Those factors would
make it
hard to link the death to the medication.

Which doesn't mean it isn't linked, just that it's difficult to
show
how much more quickly sick people die when they take drugs.
What's sad
is how extremely simple it is to construct a study demonstrating
the
life-shorterning effects of prescription drugs, which in fact is
being
done. Why don't you champion that?

A study should not be designed to demonstrate anything. Studies
should
be designed to investigate.

Well, this is one investigation that will have a predictably
demonstrable outcome.

However, I find your idea that a study should be designed to
demonstrate
how to shorten lives to be most distasteful. Didn't Dr. Mengele do
something like that?

We already have the victims, all we need is someone willing to sign
off
on the paperwork.

You're really a nutjob, aren't you? What causes someone to develop
such a blinded venom for others as you have?

Go get laid, you'll feel better.


From the AMA, AHA, ADA
19.1% of all deaths in diseases are due to doctors' prescribing.
That's a start.

A start with what? Prescribing errors? Or does this include adverse
reactions, etc.? How many of people would have died without
prescriptions? I think that sort of quantitation is nearly if not
completely impossible to accurately assess and the people that throw
those percentages around (no offense to you as I find you a reasonable
poster even if I do disagree with most everything) are being reckless
and possibly dangerous.

Also, you have to take into account that in an argument, 87.3% of all
statistics are made up on the spot.

I hear you - statistics can be manipulated to say virtually anything you
wan them to (cover your ears Herman!). I see people die given my
profession. Based on personal experience, I don't see any way that one
fifth of all deaths are due to prescribing errors.

Well, qualified and concerned physicians do. They don't wear blinders and
say, "Not us".
They, the concerned ones, who want to improve say it is THEIR fault.
I'm talking about the kingpins in their profession, not notoriety gleaning
people. They run research labs AND treat people. They are concerned and
don't fluff it off.

Your implication is rather unflattering.... I think most, in fact the
overwhelming majority of docs, care. We are concerned about upholding our
first and most sacred rule of do no harm. Leaving that alone for now, as
I'm sure you weren't intending to take some personal jabs, the issue is how
to quantify. In every profession there are alarmists and there are those
who are too laid back. It's not wearing blinders to be skeptical that a
fifth of all deaths in the US are caused by prescription errors... it's good
common sense. That would be an extraordinary claim which would require
extraordinary proof - of which there is none.

Skeptic, one of our resident pharma bloggers, wants to keep the focus
on doctors and their errors. But a much bigger issue is the
culpability of drug makers in the deaths resulting from "properly"
prescribed and administered medications -- legal drugs that kill.
Incredibly, one of the leading causes of death in the U.S. is
prescription drugs that have been "properly" prescribed and ingested.
I'd like to know what's "proper" about it? More than 2 million
prescription drug-related hospital admissions occur in the US each
year. At least 70,000 of those admissions don't make it back home
(whereas many estimates put the figure over 100,000.[1]) This doesn't
even count non-error prescription drug deaths in nursing homes,
ambulatory care, or other medical settings outside hospitals. When FDA
approves a medication for use by the general public, less than half of
the serious drug reactions are known in advance. That means you and
your loved ones become experimental subjects for the drug makers when
you take their poisons.

PeterB

[1] Kohn L, ed., Corrigan J, ed., Donaldson M, ed. To Err Is Human:
Building a Safer Health System. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press, 1999.