Talking about not trusting the pharmaceutical industry, what about the so-called ‘regulator’ of the medical profession in Australia, Ahpra, which effectively conscripted doctors, nurses and pharmacists to administer mandated vaccine products without question, and violate their legal and ethical duty to obtain voluntary informed consent?
What is going on with Ahpra?! Who is really pulling the strings there? Because they have destroyed trust in the medical profession.
Why did the practitioners go along with it? With so few exceptions they collaborated with the exploitation of the community. What is wrong in the medical profession that it was incapable of blowing the whistle on the ginormous ‘Covid’ scam?
Totally agree Elizabeth. AHPRA irrevocably broke the trust of all medical professionals in Australia. When I received the very first correspondence about "the party line" we all had to take, I was both appalled and thought I was living in the twilight zone.
The medical ‘profession’ is in a disastrous situation, what they have been a party to, devastating for the Australian population.
For starters, have a close look at the so-called ‘leadership’ of the profession…
The Royal Australasian College of Physicians, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, the Australian Medical Association. How bad have these groups been? Terrible!
Way past time for the spotlight to be shone on them.
And, of course, Paul Kelly, the Chief Medical Officer, and Chair of the AHPPC, and all the Chief Health Officers - crikey! The damage they have done!
I sat in the patients chair and asked the simple question - what treatment can you offer someone with awful Covid symptoms? Under 70 not immunocompromised or over 70 on medicines contraindicated for Paxlovid?
His sad answer
WE HAVE NOTHING..
I said
You know Lagevrio has been removed from WHO FDA EMA recommendations
He said
Yes I won’t prescribe Lagevrio, it doesn’t work. And when people have to go to hospital the wards are full of the virus, it spreads.
I told him about the antiviral nasal sprays that are not on the list of treatments but have better placebo based trials - statistically significant - but GPs are censored by govt and professional bodies from even recommending. The control of big pharma - funding regulators, lobbying politicians / ministers, controlling the journal peer review process and most of all controlling billions of profits to bribe and stop competition.
We have nothing
Is enforced Tunnel Vision that only is allowed to see Big Pharma products
"What is wrong in the medical profession that it was incapable of blowing the whistle on the ginormous ‘Covid’ scam?"
The relationship between pharma and the medical profession is complicated. Have a look at this YouTube video https://youtu.be/foj4sfQP3ek?si=AQx-IUMsU2Yp3vB3 which explains the medical/pharma relationship through the Avastin/Genentech story.
Although Bevacizumab, sold under the brand name Avastin, has been shown to increase PFS (how long it takes for disease to worsen or progresses.) in patients suffering advanced cancer it has **not** been reliably shown to prolong OS (time from diagnosis to death).
Advocates believe that PFS can be used in place of OS because PFS results of clinical trials are available sooner. Others say it distorts and manipulates the truth and helps pharma's bottom line.
What we should never forget is the coercion to have covid concoctions injected into our bodies. Without our “elephant” stamps to prove we’d had this injection, life was barely navigable for two years. My husband was dead exactly one month after his second injection. Did it cause or hasten his death? I’ll never know. Many people suffered adverse events including sudden death. Our Australian premiers and prime minister drank the cool aid and foisted it upon us too. I won’t forgive them. Marilyn S.
Marilyn - I am sorry about the loss of your husband. A long-time close friend & former colleague ended up in exactly the same sad situation. He was a retired airline pilot, was very fit & healthy, and never had any history heart disease - yet he died of cardiac problems about a month after being injected. I have no doubt that his death certificate does not draw any connection to the Covid injectable that we were coerced into accepting. The events of the last four years have completely upended my view of the medical industry, the trustworthiness of government bureaucrats, and the intelligence and competence of most Australian politicians. I take my hat off the handful of honest and courageous Australian senators who have put up a good fight to expose the depth of the evil that has been perpetrated on the Australian people.
It is sadly ironic that it is the generic good nature of the vast majority of people, that actually enables Big Pharma to persist with the disgraceful manner in which they deceive and hoodwink everyone from the GP to the patient.
The irony is based on the mirror imaging that we all possess in regards to things that relate to our health and that of our friends and family.
None of us and none of the vast majority of the public would ever consider doing anything detrimental towards a member of our family or our friends, that would worsen their health. When I say none, this includes doctors and GPs. Thus, it naturally follows, from that, particular mirror imaging that encompasses us all, we necessarily believe that anyone, or any industry that is intrinsically involved in any treatment or intervention, that is associated with improving our health and that of our families, would apply the same approach that we would naturally do. We cannot conceive of the idea that anyone would do anything that was not driven by the premise to improve our health.
It is this natural, but fundamental flaw in our inherent caring nature, that is the opening that Big Pharma has ALWAYS exploited.
If we went to a new restaurant and had an awful experience, where the food was cold and the taste not suitable to our palate, would we return again and again and again? No we would not.
Similarly, would we recommend that our friends and family visit this restaurant, such that they too could have the same awful experience? No we would not.
We would categorise this restaurant as below standard, and would ensure that no-one that we knew fell foul to the same experience that we had had. In a short time that restaurant would go out of business.
We have all had that same "restaurant" experience with the medication plied and peddled by Big Pharma. We have all been notified for decades that this Big Pharma "restaurant" is immensely dodgy and does not produce "food" products that are suitable for us. This has been illustrated to us by the billions of dollars that Big Pharma has had to pay in compensation in the court system.
So why oh why do we still return to this discredited "restaurant" time and time again? It makes absolutely no sense.
We rightly criticise the power of Big Pharma, but we do not seem to realise that it is us, the public at large that actually control this market and hold the balance of power. Pharma does not make a dime, unless it sells its "medicines" and like the bad restaurant, Pharma requires the customer/patient to turn up and accept the "medical food" that Pharma peddles.
We all have the power to ensure that we ourselves and our friends and families make ourselves more healthy, by utilising those very natural elements that exist in abundance, and in doing so, reduce our "addictions" to Big Pharma. If we do that, and question everything that, over the last 60 years has become an accepted medical idiom of ours lives, for example childhood vaccines, that make Pharma billions, with no obvious beneficial effect to the recipient, then Pharma could be brought to its knees to such an extent that it realises that it has to produce medicines that only improve our health, as opposed to "medicines" that only improve their profit line!
Up to a point I agree with everything that you have written. However I want to add that doctors are the ultimate gatekeepers with respect to prescribing medications, no one else can do so and out of laziness or sheer stupidity all too many of them are not properly informed. And there's excuse for this. We trust our doctors. We really want and need to trust our doctors and that has become the deep and tragic flaw in our relationship with them which came out so dramatically and shockingly during Covid. The question this raises is have we learned from this experience? Have they learned from this experience? And the answer to this is very problematic because it's very difficult for the average consumer as well as the average doctor to admit that they were wrong. From the consumer's point of view this is very understandable. If you've taken five or six jabs of a sketchy covid vaccine which was supposed to help you and perhaps even save your life it's terribly difficult to admit that it not only has not done any of these things but that it has actually compromised your immune system and may have even killed a loved one.
That's one big problem. The other is conflict of interest (COI). Why is Big Pharma in the wealthier nations allowed to fund the regulatory agencies? With all the money that these nations literally throw around funding useless or even worse than useless programs that the public know about or may not even know about with the public's tax dollars why cannot it be a hard and fast rule that they not be allowed to fund the agencies that regulate them and this is a problem not only in the U.S. but other rich nations. And as to the individual doctors that act as stooges, mouthpieces, for Big Pharma, why do prestigious universities that are partly funded by government such as Harvard and Oxford allow these stooges who are already nicely compensated through salaries allow these professors to accept honoraria in the form of consultancies and lecture fees which act as bribes to do their bidding.
We have abundant evidence that the regulators, left right and center, have been largely captured. Quis costodiet ipso cutodes? Who will guard the guardians?
“We trust our doctors. We really want and need to trust our doctors and that has become the deep and tragic flaw in our relationship with them…”
Max, that is a great comment. You have nailed it! During the course of this Covid medical catastrophe, that all-important ‘chain of trust’ that we just assumed ran from the patient to the patient’s doctor, up through the pharmaceutical providers, and then to the bureaucracy of the government regulatory agencies that were supposed to protect us, has now been destroyed – and all by the actions of the very same people who make up the medical industry.
The current system of pharmaceutical regulation is completely morally bankrupt. No regulatory agency should ever be allowed to have any financial dependency on the industry that they are supposed to be regulating – and any type of revolving door between the two must be made absolutely forbidden. On top of that, a high-powered body with investigatory powers should be imposed to oversee the regulators.
I suspect that the mass deployment of the mRNA injectables to an unsuspecting population may yet turn out to be the worst health catastrophe of human history. I think that it may have been Prof Robert Clancy who I heard remark words to the effect that the human DNA-RNA system was sacred ground, with which medical technicians should not interfere. But they did! I am astonished at the arrogance of the people who control the medical/pharmaceutical industry to imagine that they have any more than 10% of an understanding of the operation of such a highly evolved, integrated, and complex system as human physiology/biochemistry. These pharmaceutical fools are barely beyond the mentality of the 18th century blood-letting practitioners.
However, amongst all the bad actors and failed human beings who brought about this Covid injectable evil, I blame the people who populate the corporate media most. It was their job to question & challenge everything that was happening during the Covid pandemic, including the mass administration of the inadequately tested ‘magic’ elixir of the mRNA injectables that they promised would ‘save’ us. Instead, the people of the media sold their souls to the devil and did the opposite – they became cheerleaders for a massive deception and the mouthpieces for a program to manipulate public psychology by creating a tsunami of fear and the demonisation of anyone who questioned what was taking place. If there is ever to be a Nuremberg 2, then I would like to see the owners and operatives of the corporate media tried first. Kyrie Eleison.
Thank you for your response Max, and I agree with many of the comments that you have made, which illustrate that it all revolves around money.
Regulators have been captured by the money provided to them by Big Pharma. In the UK alone MHRA is 86% funded by Pharma. Someone who pays 86% of your salary is not doing it altruistically, they are doing it to influence you, and they will most definitely exert power over you accordingly.
Additionally, there is a revolving door of the personalities, who at sometime, are employed by Big Pharma and then shortly afterwards employed by the regulatory authorities. Or, a similar example in the UK, of a senior government medical minister Jonathan Van Tam, who was very influential over the public during Covid, who shortly afterwards took a lucrative post with Moderna. Thus, being able to utilise his many governmental contacts to keep the door open for Moderna, to seriously influence government thinking now and into the future!
I must disagree with you though on the premise that we, the public must trust our doctors. It is exactly because the system put doctors in ivory towers, and the various medical associations around the world fought so hard to ensure that only specifically medically trained individuals could use the title "doctor" that then allowed those associations, to pervert their members knowledge and status, that lead the public to look up to doctors so much.
When there is such a disparity in any system, between two symbiotic entities the result will always be an abuse of power of that entity that has been provided the greater imbalance of power.
The public were made to feel so subservient to doctors, that that allowed the public to be lead blindly by these, often feckless individuals, believing that they were the fonts of all medical knowledge.
Also, the inflated egos provided to doctors by the institutions that trained them, backed by Big Pharma, caused doctors to believe that they were Demi-gods, and that it was their word and their word alone that was the correct word, in every form of medicine.
Inflating anyone's ego to such an extent, causes them to disassociate from the fundamental purpose of their roles, that of servant to the public and their patient base. They then forget to listen to their patient base and in fact, they forget the fact that, without the appropriate care and attention to that patient base, they serve no meaningful purpose at all.
So no, patients should not trust their doctors at all, as a basic premise to their being a positive relationship between the two parties. Doctors should act in a manner, such that they earn the trust of their patient base, resultant from the considered, altruistic and respectful manner by which the doctor interacts with their patient base.
Patients should be as skeptical of their opinion and trust for their doctor, as they are of the estate agent, who blandly states that he will sell their house in a month; or the builder employed to re-tarmac their driveway, that he will turn up first thing next week; or the solicitor who states that he will finish the conveyancing in the next ten days; or the weatherman that said it will be a hot and steamy Summer, as he makes his predictions in early Spring.
None of the above individuals, or any other professionals receive the unconditional trust of their respective clients, unless and until they have proven their integrity, honesty and worth to their respective clients. The very same criteria should be adopted in regards to the relationship one has with one's doctor, as ALL other professionals and tradesmen that we engage with in our lives. Then, and only then might we find that doctors become servants to their patient base as opposed to servants to Big Pharma.
Of course the ties between Big Pharma and the five big medical journals have to be cut along the way, as well as the revolving door between regulator and the industry of which they allegedly regulate, and finally the reduction of the government lobbyists employed by Pharma to corrupt our governments, and then we might, just might, get the health services that we pay for and justifiably deserve!
I liken pharma to an invasive species. They infiltrate our institutions, universities, health agencies, politicians, medical journals and judicial. Nobody seems to have the intelligence to look at the long game. Do politicians really want to become puppets to pharma? It’s all so sordid, a life of bribes and scams.
Two hours before I read this article by Dr Julie Sladdern I had just finished listening to a really disturbing one-hour podcast on how extensively the pharmaceutical corporations in the U.S. have corrupted the medical industry, and the way they have captured the U.S. regulators. The person being interviewed is a well-known U.S. journalist, Sharyl Attkisson, who has just published a book on the topic.
I have no doubt that the medical industry in Australia is in exactly the same situation of ‘deep corruption’ – especially after I watched hearings in the Australian Senate where various medical industry actors ducked and weaved and obfuscated rather than forthrightly answer questions from the senators about the novel mRNA genetic injectables. I find the whole situation very frightening, and I fear for my grandchildren. I have now bought the book and can recommend the podcast for anyone interested – the info is:
>>>>
‘How Pharmaceutical Companies Control the Narrative’ with Sharyl Attkisson
‘The Illusion of Consensus” podcast. Descriptive blurb:
“In this conversation with Sharyl Attkisson, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, delves into how pharmaceutical companies manipulate media narratives through their advertising power, causing journalists to self-censor. We also examine how regulatory agencies like the FDA and CDC are influenced by pharmaceutical funding, which undermines public trust in their decisions. This episode highlights the pressing need for critical, independent thinking in healthcare to protect public interests.”
Excellent post. The extent to which Pharma controls the regulators, government, media, and medical education is staggering. The medical literature is polluted with Pharma-sponsored/written studies that then become the "evidence base" used by Pharma-created guideline panels.
Pharma companies are like other public companies. The directors have (within the law) a fiduciary duty to maximise returns for shareholders. They are not charities and are no more altruistic than oil or tobacco companies. Sup with a long spoon.
But governments can make laws to control oligopolies acting to maximise market power against the interests of their citizens/voters/taxpayers AND keeping out competition. Why do they not do so.
Maryanne, thank you so much for being the most excellent journalist. Just as an aside, I watched your recent documentary this morning which was thorough and informative. It’s the first time hearing your voice. You have a great voice. Anyway, this substack was so informative. These pHARMa corporations are truly psychopathic. They are too big and too powerful. I hope one day they will be prosecuted for the murderers they really are. I haven’t read the links yet but certainly will do. You are a gem.
Yes, I think drug companies have (literally) gotten away with murder because the fines they incur are not large enough to deter their illegal behaviour (they still make more profit than the fines they incur). And no one at these companies ever goes to prison.
It appears that that's their business model, make so much money by selling sketchy or even dangerous drugs and write off the fines and payouts in court as a business expense.
“…The illegal activities included manufacturing and distributing adulterated drugs, misleading marketing, failure to disclose negative information about a product (ie significant side effects including death), bribery to foreign officials, fraudulently delaying market entry of competitors, pricing and financial violations, and kickbacks…”
Big pharma utilising the worst in controlled oligopolistic advantages for huge $ returns. When will governments start doing the blood obvious and not allow any funding of regulators by big pharma.
Medical professionals had an opportunity during Covid to stand up to a danger and a corruption so egregious and obvious that it could have transformed healthcare for the better had they accepted the challenge. It shocked me that the movement against Covid mandates in Australia was not LED by medical professionals as it was in the US - although I know the price which they would have to pay in terms of their professional livelihood and reputation would have been enormous.
I’m incredibly grateful to those who did make that choice and thank God for them. But most did not and they are now paying the long-term price with a loss of trust and a gradual disengagement from the big pharma model. My own GP no longer proactively offers Covid vaccines and if she’s asked about them she tells her patients that she can’t advise fully on the risks including the long term effects so she can’t get informed consent. That’s progress I guess but she wasn’t as brave as my GP stepsister who said this in 2021, has never given any jabs, didn’t get one herself (despite immense pressure as she was pregnant at the time) and continues to advocate for a holistic approach to health to this day. She is the future of healthcare in this country.
I find it very frustrating that many GP's have a tendency to try and sell you on some prescription medication that you didn't ask for and you don't want (think Statins or dubious Antidepressants), but when you want something from them outside of that playbook, they will reluctantly drip feed you on something like a two week prescription with no repeats. Arrogantly treating you like a child. I have personally sacked three GP's for this behaviour, and am fortunate enough to have a Doctor who treats me like an adult and respects my decisions.
You can't help wondering if the majority of them are taking kickbacks from Big Pharma.
From my conversations with doctors, part of it has to do with defensive medicine - many are protecting themselves from legal liability, offering medicines and diagnostic tests to avoid being accused of medical negligence.....In the end, over-diagnosis and over-treatment leads to more harm than good.
“… fraudulently delaying market entry of competitors, …”
I really think Pfizer is behind the fraudulent delay of market entry of antiviral nasal sprays whilst using deals with govt to profiteer with Paxlovid which as shown below has failed an independent study of vaxed participants published in New England journal in April 2024 and which had similar results to the discontinued study by Pfizer themselves reported by Pfizer in June 2022. How can FDA award them with FULL authorisation in these circumstances- it must be corrupted… but with $22billion profit in 2022-3 on Paxlovid there was a lot at stake.
This week the Astodrimer sodium antiviral nasal spray Viraleze which has been stopped from entering the Australian market has had 2 medical journal publications
Astodrimer Sodium Nasal Spray versus Placebo in Non-Hospitalised Patients with COVID-19: A Randomised, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial 6 Sep 2024
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Dendrimer-based astodrimer sodium nasal spray was assessed for its ability to reduce SARS-CoV-2 load in outpatients with COVID-19, which remains a severe illness for vulnerable groups. Methods: This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical investigation evaluating the efficacy of astodrimer nasal spray in reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral burden in the nasopharynx of outpatients with COVID-19. Non-hospitalised adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection were randomised 1:1 to astodrimer or placebo four times daily from Day 1 to Day 7. Nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 load determination were self-obtained daily from Day 1 to Day 8. The primary endpoint was an area under the curve of SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/mL through Day 8 (vAUCd1–8). The primary analysis population was the modified intent-to-treat population (mITT: all randomised participants exposed to the study treatment who had at least one post-baseline viral load determination). Safety analyses included all randomised participants exposed to the study treatment. Study registration: ISRCTN70449927; Results: 231 participants were recruited between 9 January and 20 September 2023. The safety population comprised 109 and 113 participants randomised to astodrimer and placebo, respectively, with 96 and 101 participants in the mITT. Astodrimer sodium nasal spray reduced the SARS-CoV-2 burden (vAUCd1–8) vs. placebo in non-hospitalised COVID-19 patients aged 16 years and over (−1.2 log10 copies/mL × Day). The reduction in SARS-CoV-2 load was statistically significant in those aged 45 years and older (−3.7, p = 0.017) and the effect increased in older age groups, including in those aged 65 years and older (−7.3, p = 0.005). Astodrimer sodium nasal spray increased the rate of viral clearance and helped alleviate some COVID-19 symptoms, especially loss of sense of smell. Overall, 31 participants (14%) had ≥1 adverse event (AE). Four AEs were deemed possibly related to treatment. Most AEs were of mild severity and occurred at similar rates in both treatment arms. Conclusions: Astodrimer nasal spray reduces viral burden and accelerates viral clearance, especially in older populations, and is well tolerated. https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/pharmaceutics16091173/s1: additional details on viral load data processing and statistical methods, as well as supplementary tables (Tables S1–S12) and figures (Figures S1–S22).
Astodrimer sodium nasal spray forms a barrier to SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and preserves normal mucociliary function in human nasal epithelium
Abstract
COVID-19 remains a severe condition for many including immunocompromised individuals. There remains a need for effective measures against this and other respiratory infections, which transmit via virus-laden droplets that reach the nasal or oral mucosae. Nasal sprays offer potential protection against viruses. Such formulations should preserve normal nasal mucociliary function. The antiviral barrier efficacy and effects on mucociliary function of astodrimer sodium nasal spray (AS-NS) were evaluated and compared with other available nasal sprays—low pH hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC-NS), iota-carrageenan (Carr-NS), nitric oxide (NO-NS), and povidone iodine (PI-NS). Assays simulated clinical conditions. Antiviral barrier function and cell viability were assessed in airway cell monolayers, while a model of fully differentiated human nasal epithelium (MucilAir™) was utilized to evaluate tissue integrity, cytotoxicity, cilia beating frequency, and mucociliary clearance. AS-NS reduced infectious virus in cell monolayers and demonstrated a benign cytotoxicity profile. In human nasal epithelium ex vivo, AS-NS had no impact on mucociliary function (cilia beating nor mucociliary clearance). Carr-NS, HPMC-NS, NO-NS and PI-NS demonstrated limited antiviral effects, while HPMC-NS caused inhibition of mucociliary function. Astodrimer sodium nasal spray demonstrates an acceptable nonclinical efficacy and safety profile as a barrier nasal spray against respiratory viral infection in the nasal cavity.
Millions of people in Australia had nothing if they got COVID but Pfizer was able to manipulate the regulators and politicians and Google served up the search for 3 years that Viraleze was banned and fined in its country of origin.
The same refusal of regulators to approve the antiviral nasal spray SaNOtize in Canada occurred - its country of development.
How has this big pharma bounty been perpetuated with research lies promoting their own products and blocking competition.
Talking about not trusting the pharmaceutical industry, what about the so-called ‘regulator’ of the medical profession in Australia, Ahpra, which effectively conscripted doctors, nurses and pharmacists to administer mandated vaccine products without question, and violate their legal and ethical duty to obtain voluntary informed consent?
What is going on with Ahpra?! Who is really pulling the strings there? Because they have destroyed trust in the medical profession.
Why did the practitioners go along with it? With so few exceptions they collaborated with the exploitation of the community. What is wrong in the medical profession that it was incapable of blowing the whistle on the ginormous ‘Covid’ scam?
See: - Why weren't doctors, nurses and pharmacists warned not to collaborate with coercive and mandatory COVID-19 vaccination? Devastating failure to protect the public by Ahpra and the National Boards, 5 July 2024: https://vaccinationispolitical.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/why-werent-doctors-nurses-and-pharmacists-warned-not-to-collaborate-with-coercive-and-mandatory-covid-19-vaccination.pdf
Totally agree Elizabeth. AHPRA irrevocably broke the trust of all medical professionals in Australia. When I received the very first correspondence about "the party line" we all had to take, I was both appalled and thought I was living in the twilight zone.
Yes Scarlett it is absolutely grim.
The medical ‘profession’ is in a disastrous situation, what they have been a party to, devastating for the Australian population.
For starters, have a close look at the so-called ‘leadership’ of the profession…
The Royal Australasian College of Physicians, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, the Australian Medical Association. How bad have these groups been? Terrible!
Way past time for the spotlight to be shone on them.
And, of course, Paul Kelly, the Chief Medical Officer, and Chair of the AHPPC, and all the Chief Health Officers - crikey! The damage they have done!
And yet, all unaccountable and unscathed…
So far…
🙏 Maryanne clear and concise, corruption and stupidity surrounds us
GPs are good people
I sat in the patients chair and asked the simple question - what treatment can you offer someone with awful Covid symptoms? Under 70 not immunocompromised or over 70 on medicines contraindicated for Paxlovid?
His sad answer
WE HAVE NOTHING..
I said
You know Lagevrio has been removed from WHO FDA EMA recommendations
He said
Yes I won’t prescribe Lagevrio, it doesn’t work. And when people have to go to hospital the wards are full of the virus, it spreads.
I told him about the antiviral nasal sprays that are not on the list of treatments but have better placebo based trials - statistically significant - but GPs are censored by govt and professional bodies from even recommending. The control of big pharma - funding regulators, lobbying politicians / ministers, controlling the journal peer review process and most of all controlling billions of profits to bribe and stop competition.
We have nothing
Is enforced Tunnel Vision that only is allowed to see Big Pharma products
"What is wrong in the medical profession that it was incapable of blowing the whistle on the ginormous ‘Covid’ scam?"
The relationship between pharma and the medical profession is complicated. Have a look at this YouTube video https://youtu.be/foj4sfQP3ek?si=AQx-IUMsU2Yp3vB3 which explains the medical/pharma relationship through the Avastin/Genentech story.
Although Bevacizumab, sold under the brand name Avastin, has been shown to increase PFS (how long it takes for disease to worsen or progresses.) in patients suffering advanced cancer it has **not** been reliably shown to prolong OS (time from diagnosis to death).
Advocates believe that PFS can be used in place of OS because PFS results of clinical trials are available sooner. Others say it distorts and manipulates the truth and helps pharma's bottom line.
What we should never forget is the coercion to have covid concoctions injected into our bodies. Without our “elephant” stamps to prove we’d had this injection, life was barely navigable for two years. My husband was dead exactly one month after his second injection. Did it cause or hasten his death? I’ll never know. Many people suffered adverse events including sudden death. Our Australian premiers and prime minister drank the cool aid and foisted it upon us too. I won’t forgive them. Marilyn S.
Marilyn - I am sorry about the loss of your husband. A long-time close friend & former colleague ended up in exactly the same sad situation. He was a retired airline pilot, was very fit & healthy, and never had any history heart disease - yet he died of cardiac problems about a month after being injected. I have no doubt that his death certificate does not draw any connection to the Covid injectable that we were coerced into accepting. The events of the last four years have completely upended my view of the medical industry, the trustworthiness of government bureaucrats, and the intelligence and competence of most Australian politicians. I take my hat off the handful of honest and courageous Australian senators who have put up a good fight to expose the depth of the evil that has been perpetrated on the Australian people.
It is sadly ironic that it is the generic good nature of the vast majority of people, that actually enables Big Pharma to persist with the disgraceful manner in which they deceive and hoodwink everyone from the GP to the patient.
The irony is based on the mirror imaging that we all possess in regards to things that relate to our health and that of our friends and family.
None of us and none of the vast majority of the public would ever consider doing anything detrimental towards a member of our family or our friends, that would worsen their health. When I say none, this includes doctors and GPs. Thus, it naturally follows, from that, particular mirror imaging that encompasses us all, we necessarily believe that anyone, or any industry that is intrinsically involved in any treatment or intervention, that is associated with improving our health and that of our families, would apply the same approach that we would naturally do. We cannot conceive of the idea that anyone would do anything that was not driven by the premise to improve our health.
It is this natural, but fundamental flaw in our inherent caring nature, that is the opening that Big Pharma has ALWAYS exploited.
If we went to a new restaurant and had an awful experience, where the food was cold and the taste not suitable to our palate, would we return again and again and again? No we would not.
Similarly, would we recommend that our friends and family visit this restaurant, such that they too could have the same awful experience? No we would not.
We would categorise this restaurant as below standard, and would ensure that no-one that we knew fell foul to the same experience that we had had. In a short time that restaurant would go out of business.
We have all had that same "restaurant" experience with the medication plied and peddled by Big Pharma. We have all been notified for decades that this Big Pharma "restaurant" is immensely dodgy and does not produce "food" products that are suitable for us. This has been illustrated to us by the billions of dollars that Big Pharma has had to pay in compensation in the court system.
So why oh why do we still return to this discredited "restaurant" time and time again? It makes absolutely no sense.
We rightly criticise the power of Big Pharma, but we do not seem to realise that it is us, the public at large that actually control this market and hold the balance of power. Pharma does not make a dime, unless it sells its "medicines" and like the bad restaurant, Pharma requires the customer/patient to turn up and accept the "medical food" that Pharma peddles.
We all have the power to ensure that we ourselves and our friends and families make ourselves more healthy, by utilising those very natural elements that exist in abundance, and in doing so, reduce our "addictions" to Big Pharma. If we do that, and question everything that, over the last 60 years has become an accepted medical idiom of ours lives, for example childhood vaccines, that make Pharma billions, with no obvious beneficial effect to the recipient, then Pharma could be brought to its knees to such an extent that it realises that it has to produce medicines that only improve our health, as opposed to "medicines" that only improve their profit line!
Up to a point I agree with everything that you have written. However I want to add that doctors are the ultimate gatekeepers with respect to prescribing medications, no one else can do so and out of laziness or sheer stupidity all too many of them are not properly informed. And there's excuse for this. We trust our doctors. We really want and need to trust our doctors and that has become the deep and tragic flaw in our relationship with them which came out so dramatically and shockingly during Covid. The question this raises is have we learned from this experience? Have they learned from this experience? And the answer to this is very problematic because it's very difficult for the average consumer as well as the average doctor to admit that they were wrong. From the consumer's point of view this is very understandable. If you've taken five or six jabs of a sketchy covid vaccine which was supposed to help you and perhaps even save your life it's terribly difficult to admit that it not only has not done any of these things but that it has actually compromised your immune system and may have even killed a loved one.
That's one big problem. The other is conflict of interest (COI). Why is Big Pharma in the wealthier nations allowed to fund the regulatory agencies? With all the money that these nations literally throw around funding useless or even worse than useless programs that the public know about or may not even know about with the public's tax dollars why cannot it be a hard and fast rule that they not be allowed to fund the agencies that regulate them and this is a problem not only in the U.S. but other rich nations. And as to the individual doctors that act as stooges, mouthpieces, for Big Pharma, why do prestigious universities that are partly funded by government such as Harvard and Oxford allow these stooges who are already nicely compensated through salaries allow these professors to accept honoraria in the form of consultancies and lecture fees which act as bribes to do their bidding.
We have abundant evidence that the regulators, left right and center, have been largely captured. Quis costodiet ipso cutodes? Who will guard the guardians?
Quoting Max:
“We trust our doctors. We really want and need to trust our doctors and that has become the deep and tragic flaw in our relationship with them…”
Max, that is a great comment. You have nailed it! During the course of this Covid medical catastrophe, that all-important ‘chain of trust’ that we just assumed ran from the patient to the patient’s doctor, up through the pharmaceutical providers, and then to the bureaucracy of the government regulatory agencies that were supposed to protect us, has now been destroyed – and all by the actions of the very same people who make up the medical industry.
The current system of pharmaceutical regulation is completely morally bankrupt. No regulatory agency should ever be allowed to have any financial dependency on the industry that they are supposed to be regulating – and any type of revolving door between the two must be made absolutely forbidden. On top of that, a high-powered body with investigatory powers should be imposed to oversee the regulators.
I suspect that the mass deployment of the mRNA injectables to an unsuspecting population may yet turn out to be the worst health catastrophe of human history. I think that it may have been Prof Robert Clancy who I heard remark words to the effect that the human DNA-RNA system was sacred ground, with which medical technicians should not interfere. But they did! I am astonished at the arrogance of the people who control the medical/pharmaceutical industry to imagine that they have any more than 10% of an understanding of the operation of such a highly evolved, integrated, and complex system as human physiology/biochemistry. These pharmaceutical fools are barely beyond the mentality of the 18th century blood-letting practitioners.
However, amongst all the bad actors and failed human beings who brought about this Covid injectable evil, I blame the people who populate the corporate media most. It was their job to question & challenge everything that was happening during the Covid pandemic, including the mass administration of the inadequately tested ‘magic’ elixir of the mRNA injectables that they promised would ‘save’ us. Instead, the people of the media sold their souls to the devil and did the opposite – they became cheerleaders for a massive deception and the mouthpieces for a program to manipulate public psychology by creating a tsunami of fear and the demonisation of anyone who questioned what was taking place. If there is ever to be a Nuremberg 2, then I would like to see the owners and operatives of the corporate media tried first. Kyrie Eleison.
Thank you for your response Max, and I agree with many of the comments that you have made, which illustrate that it all revolves around money.
Regulators have been captured by the money provided to them by Big Pharma. In the UK alone MHRA is 86% funded by Pharma. Someone who pays 86% of your salary is not doing it altruistically, they are doing it to influence you, and they will most definitely exert power over you accordingly.
Additionally, there is a revolving door of the personalities, who at sometime, are employed by Big Pharma and then shortly afterwards employed by the regulatory authorities. Or, a similar example in the UK, of a senior government medical minister Jonathan Van Tam, who was very influential over the public during Covid, who shortly afterwards took a lucrative post with Moderna. Thus, being able to utilise his many governmental contacts to keep the door open for Moderna, to seriously influence government thinking now and into the future!
I must disagree with you though on the premise that we, the public must trust our doctors. It is exactly because the system put doctors in ivory towers, and the various medical associations around the world fought so hard to ensure that only specifically medically trained individuals could use the title "doctor" that then allowed those associations, to pervert their members knowledge and status, that lead the public to look up to doctors so much.
When there is such a disparity in any system, between two symbiotic entities the result will always be an abuse of power of that entity that has been provided the greater imbalance of power.
The public were made to feel so subservient to doctors, that that allowed the public to be lead blindly by these, often feckless individuals, believing that they were the fonts of all medical knowledge.
Also, the inflated egos provided to doctors by the institutions that trained them, backed by Big Pharma, caused doctors to believe that they were Demi-gods, and that it was their word and their word alone that was the correct word, in every form of medicine.
Inflating anyone's ego to such an extent, causes them to disassociate from the fundamental purpose of their roles, that of servant to the public and their patient base. They then forget to listen to their patient base and in fact, they forget the fact that, without the appropriate care and attention to that patient base, they serve no meaningful purpose at all.
So no, patients should not trust their doctors at all, as a basic premise to their being a positive relationship between the two parties. Doctors should act in a manner, such that they earn the trust of their patient base, resultant from the considered, altruistic and respectful manner by which the doctor interacts with their patient base.
Patients should be as skeptical of their opinion and trust for their doctor, as they are of the estate agent, who blandly states that he will sell their house in a month; or the builder employed to re-tarmac their driveway, that he will turn up first thing next week; or the solicitor who states that he will finish the conveyancing in the next ten days; or the weatherman that said it will be a hot and steamy Summer, as he makes his predictions in early Spring.
None of the above individuals, or any other professionals receive the unconditional trust of their respective clients, unless and until they have proven their integrity, honesty and worth to their respective clients. The very same criteria should be adopted in regards to the relationship one has with one's doctor, as ALL other professionals and tradesmen that we engage with in our lives. Then, and only then might we find that doctors become servants to their patient base as opposed to servants to Big Pharma.
Of course the ties between Big Pharma and the five big medical journals have to be cut along the way, as well as the revolving door between regulator and the industry of which they allegedly regulate, and finally the reduction of the government lobbyists employed by Pharma to corrupt our governments, and then we might, just might, get the health services that we pay for and justifiably deserve!
I liken pharma to an invasive species. They infiltrate our institutions, universities, health agencies, politicians, medical journals and judicial. Nobody seems to have the intelligence to look at the long game. Do politicians really want to become puppets to pharma? It’s all so sordid, a life of bribes and scams.
Two hours before I read this article by Dr Julie Sladdern I had just finished listening to a really disturbing one-hour podcast on how extensively the pharmaceutical corporations in the U.S. have corrupted the medical industry, and the way they have captured the U.S. regulators. The person being interviewed is a well-known U.S. journalist, Sharyl Attkisson, who has just published a book on the topic.
I have no doubt that the medical industry in Australia is in exactly the same situation of ‘deep corruption’ – especially after I watched hearings in the Australian Senate where various medical industry actors ducked and weaved and obfuscated rather than forthrightly answer questions from the senators about the novel mRNA genetic injectables. I find the whole situation very frightening, and I fear for my grandchildren. I have now bought the book and can recommend the podcast for anyone interested – the info is:
>>>>
‘How Pharmaceutical Companies Control the Narrative’ with Sharyl Attkisson
‘The Illusion of Consensus” podcast. Descriptive blurb:
“In this conversation with Sharyl Attkisson, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, delves into how pharmaceutical companies manipulate media narratives through their advertising power, causing journalists to self-censor. We also examine how regulatory agencies like the FDA and CDC are influenced by pharmaceutical funding, which undermines public trust in their decisions. This episode highlights the pressing need for critical, independent thinking in healthcare to protect public interests.”
The podcast is available on the common podcast outlets. The link for the Apple version is as follows: https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/the-illusion-of-consensus/id1685718305?i=1000668681452
Yes, thank you. Sharyl is a great journalist and Dr Sladden’s excellent article really resonates with many of us. 👍
Excellent post. The extent to which Pharma controls the regulators, government, media, and medical education is staggering. The medical literature is polluted with Pharma-sponsored/written studies that then become the "evidence base" used by Pharma-created guideline panels.
Pharma companies are like other public companies. The directors have (within the law) a fiduciary duty to maximise returns for shareholders. They are not charities and are no more altruistic than oil or tobacco companies. Sup with a long spoon.
But governments can make laws to control oligopolies acting to maximise market power against the interests of their citizens/voters/taxpayers AND keeping out competition. Why do they not do so.
Maryanne, thank you so much for being the most excellent journalist. Just as an aside, I watched your recent documentary this morning which was thorough and informative. It’s the first time hearing your voice. You have a great voice. Anyway, this substack was so informative. These pHARMa corporations are truly psychopathic. They are too big and too powerful. I hope one day they will be prosecuted for the murderers they really are. I haven’t read the links yet but certainly will do. You are a gem.
Thank you Vivien, sending big hugs.
Yes, I think drug companies have (literally) gotten away with murder because the fines they incur are not large enough to deter their illegal behaviour (they still make more profit than the fines they incur). And no one at these companies ever goes to prison.
It appears that that's their business model, make so much money by selling sketchy or even dangerous drugs and write off the fines and payouts in court as a business expense.
So, pHarma works like a criminal syndicate. Who would have thought.
“…The illegal activities included manufacturing and distributing adulterated drugs, misleading marketing, failure to disclose negative information about a product (ie significant side effects including death), bribery to foreign officials, fraudulently delaying market entry of competitors, pricing and financial violations, and kickbacks…”
Big pharma utilising the worst in controlled oligopolistic advantages for huge $ returns. When will governments start doing the blood obvious and not allow any funding of regulators by big pharma.
Medical professionals had an opportunity during Covid to stand up to a danger and a corruption so egregious and obvious that it could have transformed healthcare for the better had they accepted the challenge. It shocked me that the movement against Covid mandates in Australia was not LED by medical professionals as it was in the US - although I know the price which they would have to pay in terms of their professional livelihood and reputation would have been enormous.
I’m incredibly grateful to those who did make that choice and thank God for them. But most did not and they are now paying the long-term price with a loss of trust and a gradual disengagement from the big pharma model. My own GP no longer proactively offers Covid vaccines and if she’s asked about them she tells her patients that she can’t advise fully on the risks including the long term effects so she can’t get informed consent. That’s progress I guess but she wasn’t as brave as my GP stepsister who said this in 2021, has never given any jabs, didn’t get one herself (despite immense pressure as she was pregnant at the time) and continues to advocate for a holistic approach to health to this day. She is the future of healthcare in this country.
I find it very frustrating that many GP's have a tendency to try and sell you on some prescription medication that you didn't ask for and you don't want (think Statins or dubious Antidepressants), but when you want something from them outside of that playbook, they will reluctantly drip feed you on something like a two week prescription with no repeats. Arrogantly treating you like a child. I have personally sacked three GP's for this behaviour, and am fortunate enough to have a Doctor who treats me like an adult and respects my decisions.
You can't help wondering if the majority of them are taking kickbacks from Big Pharma.
From my conversations with doctors, part of it has to do with defensive medicine - many are protecting themselves from legal liability, offering medicines and diagnostic tests to avoid being accused of medical negligence.....In the end, over-diagnosis and over-treatment leads to more harm than good.
I do admire the work Julie Sladden and Maryam do in opening our eyes to the machinations of Big Pharma. Is anything they do safe?
“… fraudulently delaying market entry of competitors, …”
I really think Pfizer is behind the fraudulent delay of market entry of antiviral nasal sprays whilst using deals with govt to profiteer with Paxlovid which as shown below has failed an independent study of vaxed participants published in New England journal in April 2024 and which had similar results to the discontinued study by Pfizer themselves reported by Pfizer in June 2022. How can FDA award them with FULL authorisation in these circumstances- it must be corrupted… but with $22billion profit in 2022-3 on Paxlovid there was a lot at stake.
This week the Astodrimer sodium antiviral nasal spray Viraleze which has been stopped from entering the Australian market has had 2 medical journal publications
https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4923/16/9/1173
Astodrimer Sodium Nasal Spray versus Placebo in Non-Hospitalised Patients with COVID-19: A Randomised, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial 6 Sep 2024
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Dendrimer-based astodrimer sodium nasal spray was assessed for its ability to reduce SARS-CoV-2 load in outpatients with COVID-19, which remains a severe illness for vulnerable groups. Methods: This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical investigation evaluating the efficacy of astodrimer nasal spray in reducing SARS-CoV-2 viral burden in the nasopharynx of outpatients with COVID-19. Non-hospitalised adults with SARS-CoV-2 infection were randomised 1:1 to astodrimer or placebo four times daily from Day 1 to Day 7. Nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 load determination were self-obtained daily from Day 1 to Day 8. The primary endpoint was an area under the curve of SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies/mL through Day 8 (vAUCd1–8). The primary analysis population was the modified intent-to-treat population (mITT: all randomised participants exposed to the study treatment who had at least one post-baseline viral load determination). Safety analyses included all randomised participants exposed to the study treatment. Study registration: ISRCTN70449927; Results: 231 participants were recruited between 9 January and 20 September 2023. The safety population comprised 109 and 113 participants randomised to astodrimer and placebo, respectively, with 96 and 101 participants in the mITT. Astodrimer sodium nasal spray reduced the SARS-CoV-2 burden (vAUCd1–8) vs. placebo in non-hospitalised COVID-19 patients aged 16 years and over (−1.2 log10 copies/mL × Day). The reduction in SARS-CoV-2 load was statistically significant in those aged 45 years and older (−3.7, p = 0.017) and the effect increased in older age groups, including in those aged 65 years and older (−7.3, p = 0.005). Astodrimer sodium nasal spray increased the rate of viral clearance and helped alleviate some COVID-19 symptoms, especially loss of sense of smell. Overall, 31 participants (14%) had ≥1 adverse event (AE). Four AEs were deemed possibly related to treatment. Most AEs were of mild severity and occurred at similar rates in both treatment arms. Conclusions: Astodrimer nasal spray reduces viral burden and accelerates viral clearance, especially in older populations, and is well tolerated. https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/pharmaceutics16091173/s1: additional details on viral load data processing and statistical methods, as well as supplementary tables (Tables S1–S12) and figures (Figures S1–S22).
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-72262-w
Astodrimer sodium nasal spray forms a barrier to SARS-CoV-2 in vitro and preserves normal mucociliary function in human nasal epithelium
Abstract
COVID-19 remains a severe condition for many including immunocompromised individuals. There remains a need for effective measures against this and other respiratory infections, which transmit via virus-laden droplets that reach the nasal or oral mucosae. Nasal sprays offer potential protection against viruses. Such formulations should preserve normal nasal mucociliary function. The antiviral barrier efficacy and effects on mucociliary function of astodrimer sodium nasal spray (AS-NS) were evaluated and compared with other available nasal sprays—low pH hydroxypropyl methylcellulose (HPMC-NS), iota-carrageenan (Carr-NS), nitric oxide (NO-NS), and povidone iodine (PI-NS). Assays simulated clinical conditions. Antiviral barrier function and cell viability were assessed in airway cell monolayers, while a model of fully differentiated human nasal epithelium (MucilAir™) was utilized to evaluate tissue integrity, cytotoxicity, cilia beating frequency, and mucociliary clearance. AS-NS reduced infectious virus in cell monolayers and demonstrated a benign cytotoxicity profile. In human nasal epithelium ex vivo, AS-NS had no impact on mucociliary function (cilia beating nor mucociliary clearance). Carr-NS, HPMC-NS, NO-NS and PI-NS demonstrated limited antiviral effects, while HPMC-NS caused inhibition of mucociliary function. Astodrimer sodium nasal spray demonstrates an acceptable nonclinical efficacy and safety profile as a barrier nasal spray against respiratory viral infection in the nasal cavity.
Millions of people in Australia had nothing if they got COVID but Pfizer was able to manipulate the regulators and politicians and Google served up the search for 3 years that Viraleze was banned and fined in its country of origin.
The same refusal of regulators to approve the antiviral nasal spray SaNOtize in Canada occurred - its country of development.
How has this big pharma bounty been perpetuated with research lies promoting their own products and blocking competition.