The mainstream media reports regularly on two general health matters.
So how can these two matters be matched up? Why are we spending more on health than ever before, yet suffering more chronic disease too?
Clearly the two stories cannot be told at the same time, so this should give rise to another topic for 'the Health Debate'. But unfortunately it never does. There are some key questions that the media should be asking - but aren't
Certainly the increased consumption of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, especially during the last 60 years (following the inauguration of the NHS), and the epidemic rise in chronic diseases, have run parallel to each other. Unfortunately, this rarely seems to register within the mainstream media journalism. Here, for example, are just some of the possible connections between increased medication, and increased disease (there are many more, some highlighted in this blog over the last few years).
* In a previous blog in the series, the connection between HRT (hormone replacement therapy) and breast cancer was made, and the declining rate of this cancer since 2002 when prescriptions for HRT declined after it was found to cause breast and cervical cancer.
* The prodigious rise in the use of Statin drugs over the last few years is another example. Statins have only recently been associated with both diabetes, and prostate cancer - so are Statins one cause of the epidemic of both diseases? The media has spent enough time in recent years allowing conventional medical spokesmen tell us how 'safe' these drugs are, and how we should all be taking them! They could perhaps spare a little time asking why we are being told this, when it is palpably untrue. The media seems to be rarely interested in drug or vaccine damage.
* The link between vaccines, especially the MMR vaccine, and the Autism epidemic is increasingly well documented, but this is vehemently denied by the conventional medical establishment. The media stands full square with the pharmaceutical companies, to the extent that they will not allow any discussion on the link. They absolutely refuse to discuss it.
* The link between incidents of extreme violence, including the many mass killings in recent years, have been associated with people who are on antidepressant drugs. Yet with each incident, the association between violence and these drugs remain studiously unasked.
* The huge rise in dementia, including the earlier incidence of the disease (children and middle aged people are now contracting it) is routinely discounted by the mainstream media. It is content with conventional medicine's explanation - it is the result of people living longer'! Yet the number of pharmaceutical drugs that cause 'confusion' and 'memory loss' is legion, but the media is content to ignore this.
There are many, many more such examples of pharmaceutical drugs causing disease. Certainly they are not just simple, unimportant 'side-effects'. And what is clear is that the mainstream media are either not aware of this (and so not doing their job properly), or they are aware but not interested in investigating, and informing us about the connection.
If the media bothered to ask just a few simple questions, it might prove to be illuminating, certainly if they were asked seriously and persistently by journalists who understood the health debate, and realised that it was important for their listeners, viewers and readers to know!
- First, they tell us about new and wonderful 'medical breakthroughs', about new 'wonder drugs' being developed by the pharmaceutical industry. We are led to believe that these new treatments will eventually conquer disease, forever! These news stories usually imply that we are all beholden to conventional medicine: we are all healthier and living longer because of its amazing success conventional medicine is have in treating illness and disease.
- Second, the media will tell us about a variety of chronic diseases, how numbers are rising, how they are reaching, or have reached, epidemic levels. And that we need to spend more on conventional medicine in order to reverse this.
So how can these two matters be matched up? Why are we spending more on health than ever before, yet suffering more chronic disease too?
Clearly the two stories cannot be told at the same time, so this should give rise to another topic for 'the Health Debate'. But unfortunately it never does. There are some key questions that the media should be asking - but aren't
- What is causing this rise in chronic disease?
- Why is conventional medicine, despite its many claims about efficacy, unable to deal with this rise in chronic disease?
- And most important, is conventional medical treatment, in all its forms, contributing to this rise in chronic disease?
Certainly the increased consumption of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, especially during the last 60 years (following the inauguration of the NHS), and the epidemic rise in chronic diseases, have run parallel to each other. Unfortunately, this rarely seems to register within the mainstream media journalism. Here, for example, are just some of the possible connections between increased medication, and increased disease (there are many more, some highlighted in this blog over the last few years).
* In a previous blog in the series, the connection between HRT (hormone replacement therapy) and breast cancer was made, and the declining rate of this cancer since 2002 when prescriptions for HRT declined after it was found to cause breast and cervical cancer.
* The prodigious rise in the use of Statin drugs over the last few years is another example. Statins have only recently been associated with both diabetes, and prostate cancer - so are Statins one cause of the epidemic of both diseases? The media has spent enough time in recent years allowing conventional medical spokesmen tell us how 'safe' these drugs are, and how we should all be taking them! They could perhaps spare a little time asking why we are being told this, when it is palpably untrue. The media seems to be rarely interested in drug or vaccine damage.
* The link between vaccines, especially the MMR vaccine, and the Autism epidemic is increasingly well documented, but this is vehemently denied by the conventional medical establishment. The media stands full square with the pharmaceutical companies, to the extent that they will not allow any discussion on the link. They absolutely refuse to discuss it.
* The link between incidents of extreme violence, including the many mass killings in recent years, have been associated with people who are on antidepressant drugs. Yet with each incident, the association between violence and these drugs remain studiously unasked.
* The huge rise in dementia, including the earlier incidence of the disease (children and middle aged people are now contracting it) is routinely discounted by the mainstream media. It is content with conventional medicine's explanation - it is the result of people living longer'! Yet the number of pharmaceutical drugs that cause 'confusion' and 'memory loss' is legion, but the media is content to ignore this.
If the media bothered to ask just a few simple questions, it might prove to be illuminating, certainly if they were asked seriously and persistently by journalists who understood the health debate, and realised that it was important for their listeners, viewers and readers to know!
- Do conventional medical treatments, especially pharmaceuticaldrugs, cause disease? Are these so-called 'side-effects' or 'adverse drug reactions' actually new diseases? Should we not start calling the 'side effects' of pharmaceutical drug-taking something more akin to their seriousness? Perhaps the 'disease-inducing-effects', or DIEs, would be more appropriate!
- Does giving patients pharmaceutical drugs, that cause disease, not leading directly to disease becoming increasingly common? If patients take one drug for one condition, and then have to take another for a condition caused by the first, is it not making us sicker, more dependent on medical services?
- Why is conventional medicine unable to deal effectively with these epidemics of chronic disease?
- To what extent are the adverse reactions to pharmaceutical drugs responsible for the rising incidence of these chronic diseases?
- And, perhaps most important, are there other alternative medical therapies, that are safer, more effective, and less costly, that can deal with chronic disease? Therapies that do not cause illness and disease in the first place?
Conventional medical drugs and vaccines are not the only reason for the phenomenal increase in chronic disease. But they are, without doubt, a very significant cause. The media's neglect of this issue has meant that most sick people don't realise that their health may have been compromised by the drugs and vaccines their doctors have prescribed to make them well! It means that every patient who goes to his/her doctor does so without full knowledge of the possible consequences.
In other words, patients are unable to give their 'informed consent' to conventional medical treatment because the the information has been denied to them - by conventional medicine, alongside the willing connivance of the mainstream media.
In other words, patients are unable to give their 'informed consent' to conventional medical treatment because the the information has been denied to them - by conventional medicine, alongside the willing connivance of the mainstream media.
If you would like to be informed about the health debate why not 'follow', this blog and sign up for emails to inform you when new blogs are published.
THE HEALTH DEBATE
These are the links to other blogs in this series
(1) WHY DOES THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA REFUSE TO TAKE PART?
(2) HOW EFFECTIVE ARE PHARMACEUTICAL DRUGS?
THE HEALTH DEBATE
These are the links to other blogs in this series
(1) WHY DOES THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA REFUSE TO TAKE PART?
(2) HOW EFFECTIVE ARE PHARMACEUTICAL DRUGS?
