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

PeterB wrote:
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.

Your preconceived ideas are showing.

PeterB wrote:
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?

Considering the source, it does not affect me at all, except a slight
degree of bemusement.



Go get laid, you'll feel better.

Mark Probert wrote:
PeterB wrote:
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.

Your preconceived ideas are showing.

You mean you really aren't two different people?

"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.

"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.

"Mark Probert" wrote in message
...
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.

Exactly, but there are certain observations to review.



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?

"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.

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

"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.

"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.

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



P.S.
There is always going to be error and ignorance. What they would like to do
is reduce the number to less than 10%.
It would be foolish to think it could be eliminated or even approach 5%.