Friday, 4 May 2012

The Health Debate? (1) Why the mainstream media is refusing to take part

“I am taking this pharmaceutical drug for my condition. It is working really well, and has been now for some years. I feel really healthy, indeed back to my old self. So I am quite happy taking the drug as I am sure it is doing me no harm. Indeed, I am happy to take it for the rest of my life.”
Well, when was the last time you heard anyone taking Big Pharma drugs say this with any conviction? Most people have become weary of the serious 'disease-inducing-effects' (DIEs) of most conventional medical (or ConMed) drugs. 

There is a growing realisation that whilst these drugs may appear to be effective over a short period of time, the underlying condition is rarely, if ever, treated effectively. Many people have to take the drug for a lifetime, increasing the likelihood of its DIEs. Many have to take other drugs, often to deal with the DIEs created by the first one. And as drug effectiveness tends to decline with time, or the patient becomes addicted to the drug, the underlying illness is not being addressed.

So patients don't feel well, and they don't get well; indeed, their illness or illnesses seem to get progressively worse.
So it is perhaps not surprising that there is a significant, and growing number of people who no longer have confidence in what the ConMed Establishment (doctors, the NHS, the Government, and Big Pharma companies) are telling us. Instead, they begin to look for safer, more effective, drug-free medical treatment for their illnesses.
This is what constitutes "the health debate". It is going on within families throughout Britain, indeed throughout the entire western world - anywhere where health treatment is dominated by the Big Pharma drugs. 

Unfortunately, however, it is a very quiet debate as it is almost impossible to get any open, or transparent information into the mainstream media about what is really going on out here, in the world of health.

So for people who are looking for safer, more effective, drug-free treatment, it is a ‘debate’ that is just not happening.  
One problem is that the 'alternative medical world', such as the homeopathy community, has only a tiny voice, and it is a voice that is often marginalised and neglected by the Media. And of course, the voices raised against these small communities are loud and powerful, voices that seek to undermine and belittle the health debate, and the search for safe medical therapies. 
Foremost amongst these voices are the Big Pharma companies. Their power, influence and wealth is quite extraordinary. They have achieved almost total dominance within the National Health Service (NHS). In is now difficult to obtain any other form of treatment in our 'free' health service. Most of the 'medical experts’ working in the NHS are trained in, and totally committed to, drug-based medicine. 

And the mainstream media appear to believe these are the only health experts that exist! 
The Conventional Medical Establishment have powerful contacts within our parliament and successive Governments. Big Pharma, after all, is an important contributor to the UK economy, a major investor in industry and commerce, and a major employer. The story they want to project is that we are healthier now than we have ever been, and that are living longer - because of the success of success ConMed treatment.
Our so-called ‘Free’ Press and Media seems to be quite unable, and perhaps even unwilling to question or criticise the ConMed Establishment. Why? Perhaps because of the size of Big Pharma’s advertising budgets! Perhaps because those in charge of 'Big Corp' stick together, and support each other. Certainly, the social social influence of Big Pharma seems to have much to do with its wealth, and what (and perhaps who) that money can buy. Indeed, it seems to have very little to do with the ability to provide us with effective, safe or even cost-effective medicine!
Even the BBC, who are not dependent on advertising revenues, seem to be quite unable or unwilling to speak out - or even to allow a discussion on ‘the health debate’.
Yet despite this deafening silence from the mainstream media, interest in ‘non-drug’ therapies is increasing. People are moving away from ConMed, either through personal experience, or gleaning information from the dribs and drabs of information that the media cannot prevent reporting. Most important, people are resorting to the internet, and to blogs like this one, to find information about health. 

So despite the reluctance of the mainstream media to engage in "the health debate", information about the dangers of ConMed drugs and vaccines, and the people who have been damaged by them, is increasingly out here. The result is that people are now less inclined to believe in ConMed's claims of ‘miracle cures’, and the media's slavish adherence to them. People are becoming more aware that much of the illness, disease and death seen today, often at epidemic levels, has actually been caused by ConMed drugs.

So what are the components of "the health debate". What should the Media be discussing, but are choosing to ignore? I will deal with this in the second part of this series.

If you would like to be informed when the second part of this series is published, why not become a 'follower', and sign up for this blog; or subscribe to it by email - and join the Health Debate.