On 15th January 2013, BBC News meekly and slavishly announced 'great new information' for those women who fear contracting Breast Cancer. The news, on BBC radio and television, was supported by this article on the BBC News website.
Then on 25th June 2013 BBC News meekly and slavishly announced the 'good news' again. The NHS were now going to allow women to take the drug, Tamoxifen, for up to 5 years, in order to prevent breast cancer.
The way this news is being treated by the BBC demonstrates just how partial they are in reporting on anything to do with health, and how they are failing in their duty to inform the general public about the dangers of Conventional Medicine. The news initially referred to NICE's decision to examine whether pharmaceutical drugs can now be used as a preventative for breast cancer, especially for women who have a history of breast cancer in their family. The later news was its decision to allow it.
Tamoxifen, the drug being considered by NICE for this purpose, is not a new one. I will outline in this blog what is known, and what is suspected about the DIEs (Disease Inducing Effects) relating to this drug. But first, the 'side-effects' mentioned by the BBC. This is what they said in their article.
Then on 25th June 2013 BBC News meekly and slavishly announced the 'good news' again. The NHS were now going to allow women to take the drug, Tamoxifen, for up to 5 years, in order to prevent breast cancer.
The way this news is being treated by the BBC demonstrates just how partial they are in reporting on anything to do with health, and how they are failing in their duty to inform the general public about the dangers of Conventional Medicine. The news initially referred to NICE's decision to examine whether pharmaceutical drugs can now be used as a preventative for breast cancer, especially for women who have a history of breast cancer in their family. The later news was its decision to allow it.
Tamoxifen, the drug being considered by NICE for this purpose, is not a new one. I will outline in this blog what is known, and what is suspected about the DIEs (Disease Inducing Effects) relating to this drug. But first, the 'side-effects' mentioned by the BBC. This is what they said in their article.
"But this (the benefits claimed by NICE) would have to be balanced against the risks associated with taking the drug, such as blood clots".
So, just a few blood clots. Well worth the risk, then!
Except that this ignores just about every one of the serious side effects Tamoxifen has been associated with for the last 30 years and more!
- The benefits of Tamoxifen have been exaggerated, and the 'side-effects under-stated, as described fully in this GreenMedInfo.Com article.
- Tamoxifen actually causes breast cancer, especially in long-term users. This was outlined by the magazine "What Doctor's Don't Tell you" in October 2009.
- The breast cancers caused by Tamoxifen is a far more aggressive for of breast cancer. This is an important observation made about Tamoxifen, and reported in this Natural Health article.
- Tamoxifen was declared to be a 'carcinogen' by WHO (the World Health Organisation) in the late 1990's, and this was confirmed in the NIH "Report on Carcinogens", 2000, in which NIH reported:
- Tamoxifen can cause secondary tumours. This was actually reported in the mainstream media on 26th August 2009, by Steve Connor, Science Editor, the Independent. The article stated
"A drug widely used to treat breast cancer has been found to increase four-fold the risk of developing a second tumour in the opposite breast, scientists have said".
Why BBC News, along with the rest of the mainstream media, routinely ignores this 'contrary' evidence is a question worth asking by anyone who is being treated with drug-dominated treatment on the NHS. Are we being given the full facts? As a a public broadcaster the BBC is not dependent upon advertising revenue. The Pharmaceutical , and related companies are big advertising spenders, and so they will have an influence on what is reported. If anything, therefore, the BBC should be able to take a far more independent and dispassionate view on these medical and health issues.
Yet, BBC News steadfastly refuses to do so - not just in this case but on almost every health issue on which it has reported for the last decade or so.
Sick people in this country are not well served by its media. The NHS is dominated by conventional medicine, and in particular, by dominated by drug-based treatments. Of course, it is entirely fair that the mainstream media presents what NICE are planning to do. But if patients are to be properly informed about health matters journalists have to be more aware of the full picture. And as far as BBC (or public funded) journalism is concerned, they have to recognise that it is their duty, contained in their Editorial Guidelines, to report impartially on health matters. And, as in this case, BBC News routinely fails to do so.
