<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite">More on fraudulent science. Why should we trust scientists and science?<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">In view of the push on this list about how safe GMOs are, the following is<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">germane. Read this:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">A shocking admission by the editor of the world’s most respected medical<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">journal, The Lancet, has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Dr. Richard Horton, Editor-in-chief of the Lancet recently published a<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">statement declaring that a shocking amount of published research is<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">unreliable at best, if not completely false, as in, fraudulent.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Horton declared, “Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.”<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">To state the point in other words, Horton states bluntly that major<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">pharmaceutical companies falsify or manipulate tests on the health, safety<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">and effectiveness of their various drugs by taking samples too small to be<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">statistically meaningful or hiring test labs or scientists where the lab or<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">scientist has blatant conflicts of interest such as pleasing the drug<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">company to get further grants. At least half of all such tests are<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">worthless or worse he claims. As the drugs have a major effect on the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">health of millions of consumers, the manipulation amounts to criminal<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">dereliction and malfeasance.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">The drug industry-sponsored studies Horton refers to develop commercial<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">drugs or vaccines to supposedly help people, used to train medical staff,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">to educate medical students and more.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Horton wrote his shocking comments after attending a symposium on the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research at the Wellcome<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Trust in London. He noted the confidentiality or “Chatham House” rules<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">where attendees are forbidden to name names: “‘A lot of what is published<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">is incorrect.’ I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">photographs of slides.”<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Other voices<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Dr. Marcia Angell is a physician and was longtime Editor-in-Chief of the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">New England Medical Journal (NEMJ), considered to be another one of the<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world. Angell stated,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the New England Journal of Medicine.”<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Harvey Marcovitch, who has studied and written about the corruption of<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">medical tests and publication in medical journals, writes, “studies showing<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">positive outcomes for a drug or device under consideration are more likely<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">to be published than ‘negative’ studies; editors are partly to blame for<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">this but so are commercial sponsors, whose methodologically well-conducted<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">studies with unfavorable results tended not to see the light of day…”<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">At the University of British Columbia’s Neural Dynamics Research Group in<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Dr Lucija Tomljenovic<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">obtained documents that showed that, “vaccine manufacturers, pharmaceutical<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">companies, and health authorities have known about multiple dangers<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">associated with vaccines but chose to withhold them from the public. This<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">is scientific fraud, and their complicity suggests that this practice<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">continues to this day.”<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Lancet’s Dr. Horton concludes, “Those who have the power to act seem to<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">think somebody else should act first. And every positive action (eg,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">funding well-powered replications) has a counter-argument (science will<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">become less creative). The good news is that science is beginning to take<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">some of its worst failings very seriously. The bad news is that nobody is<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">ready to take the first step to clean up the system.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Corruption of the medical industry worldwide is a huge issue, perhaps more<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">dangerous than the threat of all wars combined. Do we have such hypnosis<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">and blind faith in our doctors simply because of their white coats that we<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">believe they are infallible? And, in turn, do they have such blind faith in<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">the medical journals recommending a given new wonder medicine or vaccine<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">that they rush to give the drugs or vaccines without considering these<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">deeper issues?<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Outlook”.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Comment: Finally, finally, we have some deep acknowledgement from<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">establishment science of what others in the alternative health field have<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">been saying, literally, for decades – and have become vilified for. The<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">run-away train that has become modern medicine and science has, and will,<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">destroy the life of many millions. Its time that the people of conscience<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">in this field take a much stronger stand.<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Source: New Eastern Outlook, 18 June 2015<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">Share this:<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">________________</blockquote></div></body></html>