NEVER ENOUGH STUDIES/EVIDENCE
Medical
Mind Control
[back] Medical study ploys
[The main ploy in the MMR autism scandal, where the only studies actually studying the children are being submerged by epidemiology studies, another ploy in itself. A game beloved by Pharma trolls giving the impression they are looking for the truth and would use it is provided with it. Eg 'Harradine'. Why would an Allopath want proof that Homeopathy or Nutritional medicine works?]
See: Looking were it ain't Newsgroup pharma shills
Scientists used the excuse that there were never enough studies revealing the
dangers of DDT and other dangerous pesticides to ban them. They also used this
excuse around the issue of tobacco, claiming that more studies were needed
before they could be certain that tobacco really caused lung cancer. Even the
American Medical Association (AMA) was complicit in suppressing results of
tobacco research. In 1964, the Surgeon General's report condemned smoking,
however the AMA refused to endorse it. What was their reason? They needed more
research. Actually what they really wanted was more money and they got it from a
consortium of tobacco companies who paid the AMA $18 million over the next nine
years, during which the AMA said nothing about the dangers of smoking.
The Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA), "after careful consideration of the extent to which
cigarettes were used by physicians in practice," began accepting tobacco
advertisements and money in 1933. State journals such as the New York State
Journal of Medicine also began to run Chesterfield ads claiming that cigarettes
are, "Just as pure as the water you drink… and practically untouched by human
hands." In 1948, JAMA argued "more can be said in behalf of smoking as a form of
escape from tension than against it… there does not seem to be any preponderance
of evidence that would indicate the abolition of the use of tobacco as a
substance contrary to the public health." Today, scientists continue to use the
excuse that they need more studies before they will lend their support to
restrict the inordinate use of drugs.
Death
by Medicine----Carolyn Dean, MD, ND, Martin Feldman, MD, Gary Null, PhD, Debora
Rasio, MD (2003/4)
The Government's scientists will often ask
for conclusive proof when they are challenged. It is a word often used when you
wish to win your side of the argument. Scientifically conclusive proof is
impossible to obtain – let me explain.
I was at a legal hearing in Torquay
representing a community and the barrister representing the communications
industry said "there is no conclusive proof that these microwaves will cause
damage". I argued: if somebody stood up and shot me in this courtroom there
would be three levels of proof. You would have everybody as a witness and that
would be accepted in a Court of Law. A pathologist could perform a post mortem,
decide that the bullet killed me and that would be a second level of proof. If,
however you wanted conclusive proof that the bullet killed me, you would have to
argue that at the split second the bullet went into my body every system in my
body was working perfectly because there are thousands of reasons why I could
drop dead on the spot before the bullet went in and you would have to prove
conclusively that all of these systems were working perfectly before the bullet
went in. Clearly, this is scientifically impossible; there is no such thing as
conclusive proof, yet it is what is demanded by government scientists when
challenging their decisions. Confidential Report on
TETRA for the Police of England and Wales by B Trower
[Here is a denial classic.]
I asked you for evidence that demonstrated that
deaths were actually caused by the Urabe strain, and you have singularly failed
to provide any evidence whatsoever. You have provided media reports, opinions of
parents, and decisions of tribunals or courts. These are not evidence of
causality that implicates the Urabe vaccine. Nobody would disagree that deaths have been reported after MMR vaccines. But
deaths after vaccination are very different from deaths caused by vaccination.
Dr David Salisbury, director of immunisation, department of health,
London 19.03.07
[2007] Parliament was given false MMR assurance