Who does the
medical media work for? It's a simple question. Why does the medical media
ignore all the controversies that exist around major medical issues and
concentrate on reporting only on the official party lines of the CDC, FDA,
AMA and the World Health Organization? These are questions that will lead to
a kind of scandal the public media has never faced, one that will make the
one that the BBC is presently facing seem small. The BBC is embroiled in
challenges to its fairness and objectivity, essential responsibilities the
press has to the public. Heads are rolling but this is nothing to what will
happen if the truth ever gets out about the medical reporting departments at
the BBC or the Times on both sides of the Atlantic. When it comes to
medicine all newspapers, radio and television stations around the world
report only what is 'approved' not what is fair or objective. Morris A.
Bealle, a former city editor of the old Washington Times said, "Even the
most independent newspapers are dependent on their press associations for
their national news and there is no reason for a news editor to suspect that
a story coming over the wires of the Associated Press, the United Press or
the International News Service is censored when it concerns health matters.
Yet this is what happens constantly."
The medical-drug cartel was summed up by J.W Hodge, M.D., of Niagara Falls,
N.Y., in these words: "The medical monopoly or medical trust,
euphemistically called the American Medical Association, is not merely the
meanest monopoly ever organized, but the most arrogant, dangerous and
despotic organization which ever managed a free people in this or any other
age. Any and all methods of healing the sick by means of safe, simple and
natural remedies are sure to be assailed and denounced by the leaders of the
AMA as fakes, frauds and humbugs." The AMA, which is interlocked with
powerful medical groups like the FDA, the CDC and WHO, have somehow
persuaded editors at all the major wire and news services to adopt policies
which would not permit any medical news to clear that is not approved by
these over lording organizations.
Medical assumptions are the bedrock of the medical establishment whether
they are provable or not. So great is the lockstep in the press around
medical issues like AIDS, cancer and vaccines one almost has to be a
complete fool to challenge them. The medical establishment and the medical
media work together as intellectual reductionists who ignore and diminish
the truth of doctors and scientists around the world who do not agree with
the meal that gets published in the medical news each week. It does not take
much intelligence to figure out that medical news censors are not going to
approve any item that can in any way hurt the sale of drugs. It's a taboo
that is rarely broken.
It is clear that the press feels the need to represent the basic beliefs of
allopathic medicine without any care to the truth or falsity of what they
are printing. When it comes to medicine we are dealing with people's lives
so the medical media has a great responsibility. The public gives the media
the same trust on medical issues that people give to their doctors, health
officials and medical organizations. Many people depend on the medical press
for information on which to make very important decisions.
If you cannot trust the medical press and your doctor to inform you of
different opinions that exist on important medical issues whom can you
trust? The answers to this are not going to come from your doctor or the
medical news media. Trust is leaking out of the medical press and the
overall medical community like oil leaking out from a damaged tanker. The
leak would quickly turn into a massive brain hemorrhage if it were not for
the mainstream medical press that keeps many fingers in the dike, holding
off all challengers to mainstream medical assumptions.
Again we must ask the question why does the press buy totally into the
allopathic party line? What do they get out of printing stories that are
shaped by others? Senator John Edwards said recently, "The interests of the
great corporations and the wealthy, privileged classes are not the same as
those of American working families. And because the power of government has
shifted so radically in favor of the interests of the former, there is
little left but indifference to the needs and aspirations of the latter, who
just happen to be the vast majority of Americans." This has never been truer
than in the area of medicine where the great pharmaceutical and chemical
companies have held open season on control and manipulation of doctors for
over a century. And it does seem that these controlling interests have a
throttle hold over the medical media for it is only what they want you to
read that you will read.
The great problem for the media of course is that hundreds of thousands of
people are dying at the hands of modern day allopathic medicine, that means
everyday there are deaths going unreported. Malaria, a disease forgotten by
the press, is advancing, killing a million people or more a year, at least
700,000 of them African children. Yet the public is being scared by the
medical media about bird flu, which has killed as many as a dozen people
recently and of course we are going to hear repeatedly about how the race is
on to develop a vaccine. Before that it was weeks of the media participating
in the medical communities need to scare parents enough to stampede them
into buying slow moving ineffective and dangerous flu shots, which are now
being given away. You will not hear in the press about the dangers of the
new FluMist vaccine nor that some scientists have warned that repeated flu
shots dramatically increase the chances of Alzheimer disease.
Before that it was SARS and publishing news about AIDS is very popular no
matter how many doctors and scientists disagree with accepted AIDS theories.
From fear to fear the medical community would have the public go. Perhaps
they are trying to divert our attention from what we should really be afraid
of. Or are they just trying to sell newspapers and increase advertising
sales. Ex newspaper man Morris A. Bealle sees something like a communist
styled controlling censor system that gives the press little choice in the
matter of what medical news can be published. Certainly you will not see a
report about Dr Allen Roses, vice-president of GlaxoSmithKline, the giant
pharmaceutical maker, who recently confessed that over 90 per cent of all
drugs work for only between 30 and 50 per cent of patients. Nor will you
hear any calls for changes in the concentration camp type of conditions in
which chickens are raised. Conditions that are possibly creating the dangers
humanity might face with bird flu. Never will the press reach down to the
causes of disease, what they print are medical solutions that do not address
causes.
It does seem that most people in the medical press understand little to
nothing about health and medicine and perhaps this is the problem. Lacking
knowledge and deep understanding they gullibly print just about anything
sent to them over the news wires. It is no surprise to media watchers when
the press publishes from the angle of an agenda, but in this case an agenda
not even of their own. In the case of the medical news the fault does seem
to lie with the authorities and senior editors more than with reporters. But
whatever is actually going on it stands to reason that the whole
international lot of them should be put through some kind of mandatory
educational process with inputs from various medical and health disciplines.
In the end there are no excuses and the heads of the top brass should roll
like they are in London this past week. If the truth comes out no doubt
enough heads will fall that they will outdistance the reported deaths from
the bird flu, SARS and the common flu combined.
In reflection if you think that the medical news is not being manipulated
and masterminded by some organizations take a careful look at the words and
phrases that are constantly being used. For instance watch the rather loose
usage of the term "epidemic", which was used so much in connection with the
SARS scare. The first reports of Bird Flu are also being referred to it as
an epidemic. The report I first saw that called it an epidemic reported the
death of two people. The words Bird Flu, epidemic, people dead, all in the
same paragraph convey a powerful implication that the unwary will accept
without much question. And everyone of course can now breathe a sigh of
relief for surviving this year's flu epidemic.
Who cares after all about all the kids dying of malaria and the millions
dying of hunger, unsanitary living conditions and undrinkable polluted
water? Who cares that the medical profession is actually getting away with
murder killing hundreds of thousands a year with 'properly' prescribed
medicines? No one because the press will never report it that way! Who cares
that today and everyday all the children that are born will have a highly
dangerous liquid injected into their blood streams, one that contains toxic
chemicals that can create all kinds of health problems and even death. I
personally know that Dr. Jane Orient cares, president of the American
Association of Physicians and Surgeons, she and many others have publicly
come out against the Hepatitis B vaccine. But will you ever hear her voice
published in the medical press?
Is it really possible that the international press agencies are actually
participating in crimes against humanity? This is a dangerous question to
ask and only the international courts at The Hague in Europe could
eventually answer this. But if key medical organizations are eventually
convicted of such crimes then surely the medical press will be hauled in as
accomplices.
Dr. Matthias Rath and Dr. Aleksandra Niedzwiecki of the Dr. Rath Health
Foundation have already brought such charges to the world court. It is a
dangerous moment for the medical press and perhaps some brave journalistic
souls will find the courage to start investigative reportages about these
subjects and perhaps this can salvage the image the medical press will have
in history. If Lord Hutton of England can initiate the rolling of so many
heads at the BBC over a small issue imagine what he and others would do over
serious issues that actually cost the lives of children and adults all over
the world.
