HES drips, used to treat critically ill patients, and patients undergoing surgery, were suspended by the MHRA (Britain's drug regulator) on 27th June 2013.
The reason, we were told in an MRHA press release, was that 'the benefits no long outweighed the risks'.
HES (Hydroxyethal Starch) drips have been licensed for use since the 1980's, and in over 30 years, they are now known to have caused thousands, and probably hundred's of thousands of unnecessary deaths in British hospitals through renal, or kidney failure, and increased morbidity.
Some doctors have apparently been calling for a ban on these drips since the 1990's, but as so often when drugs, vaccines and other conventional medical treatments are questioned, nothing was done to protect patients by drug regulators, who task is - to protect patients!
It would seem that as far as the Conventional Medical Establishment is concerned, taking action to protect patients against dangerous drugs and vaccines appears to be a last, and final resort. It is not difficult to argue that it is probably easier for them to allow people to die rather than to admit that a treatment they have approved, and has been used routinely within the NHS for decades, has actually been killing people for many years - under their very nose!
Surprisingly, the BBC appears to have picked up this story. Usually, like the rest of the mainstream media in Britain, they complacently ignore such stories, and fail to investigate anything that is critical of the Conventional Medical Establishment. However, the Radio 4 programme, 'You and Yours' reported the ban on 19th August 2013, and it was dealt with in more detail on on the 'Face the Facts' programme on 21st August 2013. Two months after the ban, and 20+ years after initial concerns were being expressed, but at least the BBC has risen from its usual torpor and apparent indifference when it comes to patients being harmed by conventional drugs and vaccines.
Professor Ian Roberts, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, was featured on this programme. Apparently, he had raised the subject in 1998, as he considered that there was not evidence of benefit "and a trend towards harm", (Interesting language)? He made the point that many millions of people have used this drip, and if just 2% were harmed, this meant that some 20,000 people per million would have suffered. Later in the programme, it was stated that 4 million people used the drip between 2008 and 2012 alone.
Before this time, two studies were released. One, a French study in 2001, pointed to the kidney damage the drips were causing. The second, a German study in 2008, point not only to renal failure, but to 'unnecessary deaths'.
Instead, the programme said, numerous studies suddenly appeared that 'played down the harm caused by this drips'. Again, this is how the 'evidence' of 'evidence based' medicine is so often undermined. Any suggestion that a profitable drug or vaccine is harmful, and 'positive' studies begin to appear that suggest otherwise, and these studies are often funded by the companies who are profiting from the drug.
As far as HES drips were concerned, Professor Joachim Boldt was apparently available to support the Pharmaceutical industry. Boldt, a German anesthesiologist, and professor at Giessen University, is now known to have falsified 'scientific' research papers that supported the use of this drug. He has been stripped of his professorship, and he is now under criminal investigation for the possible forgery of up to 90 research studies (Wikipedia).
It is quite remarkable how much fraud is associated with conventional medical drugs and vaccines, and this is just one more example of the mis-selling and bogus promotional activity that underlies so much conventional medicine. It dominates what the Department of Health, the NHS, and our local GP's tell us about the health treatment they have to offer us.
The three drug companies who manufacture the HES drip have apparently admitted that Professor Boldt was paid to speak at medical conferences. But they continue to deny that there is anything wrong with the drug, and challenge the new findings.
As they said to the BBC, the drip continues to be used in the USA, and elsewhere, where there are no such reports of harm!
This is how the pharmaceutical industry operation. They use junk science, cheque-book science - the science that allows them to produce, get a licence, and sell dangerous and lethal products for profit. And they do this all at the expense of patients, their health, and even their lives.
And as the programme intimated, has to be question marks raised about the regulation of conventional medical drugs. Why, after the studies of 2001 and 2008 was there no response, no insistence on a thorough investigation from either the European Drugs Agency, or the British MHRA? Why was the MHRA still approving new drugs of this type as recently as 2010.
Why are the drug regulatory agencies failing to do their job, to protect patients from harm?
Why is the Conventional Medical Establishment happy to continue peddling drugs and vaccines that are known to cause us harm?
Why are our doctors failing to comply with their Hippocratic Oath?
But, at least, congratulations to the BBC for doing at least one piece of honest and informative journalism on an important health issue.
The reason, we were told in an MRHA press release, was that 'the benefits no long outweighed the risks'.
HES (Hydroxyethal Starch) drips have been licensed for use since the 1980's, and in over 30 years, they are now known to have caused thousands, and probably hundred's of thousands of unnecessary deaths in British hospitals through renal, or kidney failure, and increased morbidity.
Some doctors have apparently been calling for a ban on these drips since the 1990's, but as so often when drugs, vaccines and other conventional medical treatments are questioned, nothing was done to protect patients by drug regulators, who task is - to protect patients!
It would seem that as far as the Conventional Medical Establishment is concerned, taking action to protect patients against dangerous drugs and vaccines appears to be a last, and final resort. It is not difficult to argue that it is probably easier for them to allow people to die rather than to admit that a treatment they have approved, and has been used routinely within the NHS for decades, has actually been killing people for many years - under their very nose!
Surprisingly, the BBC appears to have picked up this story. Usually, like the rest of the mainstream media in Britain, they complacently ignore such stories, and fail to investigate anything that is critical of the Conventional Medical Establishment. However, the Radio 4 programme, 'You and Yours' reported the ban on 19th August 2013, and it was dealt with in more detail on on the 'Face the Facts' programme on 21st August 2013. Two months after the ban, and 20+ years after initial concerns were being expressed, but at least the BBC has risen from its usual torpor and apparent indifference when it comes to patients being harmed by conventional drugs and vaccines.
Professor Ian Roberts, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, was featured on this programme. Apparently, he had raised the subject in 1998, as he considered that there was not evidence of benefit "and a trend towards harm", (Interesting language)? He made the point that many millions of people have used this drip, and if just 2% were harmed, this meant that some 20,000 people per million would have suffered. Later in the programme, it was stated that 4 million people used the drip between 2008 and 2012 alone.
Before this time, two studies were released. One, a French study in 2001, pointed to the kidney damage the drips were causing. The second, a German study in 2008, point not only to renal failure, but to 'unnecessary deaths'.
These studies, as is so often happens, failed to lead to any reaction from the drug regulators.
Instead, the programme said, numerous studies suddenly appeared that 'played down the harm caused by this drips'. Again, this is how the 'evidence' of 'evidence based' medicine is so often undermined. Any suggestion that a profitable drug or vaccine is harmful, and 'positive' studies begin to appear that suggest otherwise, and these studies are often funded by the companies who are profiting from the drug.
As far as HES drips were concerned, Professor Joachim Boldt was apparently available to support the Pharmaceutical industry. Boldt, a German anesthesiologist, and professor at Giessen University, is now known to have falsified 'scientific' research papers that supported the use of this drug. He has been stripped of his professorship, and he is now under criminal investigation for the possible forgery of up to 90 research studies (Wikipedia).
It is quite remarkable how much fraud is associated with conventional medical drugs and vaccines, and this is just one more example of the mis-selling and bogus promotional activity that underlies so much conventional medicine. It dominates what the Department of Health, the NHS, and our local GP's tell us about the health treatment they have to offer us.
The three drug companies who manufacture the HES drip have apparently admitted that Professor Boldt was paid to speak at medical conferences. But they continue to deny that there is anything wrong with the drug, and challenge the new findings.
As they said to the BBC, the drip continues to be used in the USA, and elsewhere, where there are no such reports of harm!
So if you live outside Europe, beware!
This is how the pharmaceutical industry operation. They use junk science, cheque-book science - the science that allows them to produce, get a licence, and sell dangerous and lethal products for profit. And they do this all at the expense of patients, their health, and even their lives.
And as the programme intimated, has to be question marks raised about the regulation of conventional medical drugs. Why, after the studies of 2001 and 2008 was there no response, no insistence on a thorough investigation from either the European Drugs Agency, or the British MHRA? Why was the MHRA still approving new drugs of this type as recently as 2010.
Why are the drug regulatory agencies failing to do their job, to protect patients from harm?
Why is the Conventional Medical Establishment happy to continue peddling drugs and vaccines that are known to cause us harm?
Why are our doctors failing to comply with their Hippocratic Oath?
But, at least, congratulations to the BBC for doing at least one piece of honest and informative journalism on an important health issue.
