CBD OIL. Why does pharmaceutical medicine not want to know? Whatever happened to Patient Choice?

Medical cannabis, CBD oil, or cannabidiol, based on cannabis or marijuana, is controversial.

In the UK there are an increasing number of parents who are demanding access CBD oil through the NHS. A gruop of parents today (5 February 2020) have travelled to Westminster to lobby MP's, demanding free medical cannabis prescriptions for their children. Cannabidiol is very expensive, and the conventional medical establishment does not appear too keen on granting anyone access to it, certainly not the UK's Department of Health, and the NHS.

The makers of Cannabidiol claim that it is non-psychoactive (it doesn't act like cannabis), and make many marketing claims for CBD oil.

• it is claimed to be the answer to many illnesses, including chronic pain, diabetes, depression, anxiety, epilepsy, seizures, and autism.
• over 50% of patients using can stop taking pharmaceutical drugs.
• that it has been clinically proven in treating a wide range of health benefits
• it can regulate mood patterns and sleep cycles
• it can mitigates inflammatory response
• improve cognitive performance

So what is the row about? Why is there such disagreement? If parents want it for their children; and it has such sweeping benefits why is it not being offered to them, free on the NHS? Is it the expense? Pharmaceutical drugs which are equally expensive can be obtained on the NHS. Or is the problem that CDB oil is effective and might reduce demand for pharmaceutical drugs? The drug companies would not welcome this.

Medical cannabis was made legal in he UK in 2018, yet many parents are spending more than £1000 per month on buying it for their child. The campaigners visiting Westminster are mainly parents of severely epileptic or autistic children who have decided to take legal action to challenge the NHS's refusal or failure to prescribe it. Very few people obtain a prescription for medical cannabis, a few children and adults with rare and severe forms of epilepsy, some who have serious side effects from chemotherapy, and some people with multiple sclerosis (MS).

The NHS defends this stance in a number of ways.

• There are concerns about the safety of medical cannabis (although there are no concerns about the pharmaceutical drugs currently being prescribed). 
• There has been inadequate scientific trials (the testimony of parents who have used it and found it to be transformational is not sufficient). 
• Medical cannabis is not required when there are pharmaceutical alternatives (and parents can have as many of these drugs as they need, even if parents say they do not work).
• The fact that prescribing CBD oil might damage sales of the pharmaceutical drugs currently being used is, of course, denied.

I am not entering into a discussion about any of these political/financial/medical arguments. I would rather the NHS, and these campaigning parents, discovered the advantages of (i) not using pharmaceutical medicine, and particular childhood vaccines, which have most likely caused the problems of epilepsy and autism in the first place, and (ii) the benefits of homeopathy, and other natural therapies, which would offer safer, more effective, and less expensive solutions.

However, the issue surrounding medical cannabis clearly demonstrates another important issue: Health Freedom and Patient Choice.

The Conservative government came to power in 2010 advocating patient choice. Remember the White Paper - "no decision about me without me". Whatever happened to that? It was never publicly reversed, just left on a shelf to be forgotten, to gather dust! The pharmaceutical companies certainly did not like it; perhaps they thought too many people would not want to take their drugs and vaccines. And perhaps the drug companies were too powerful for the weak, irresolute conservative politicians.

At the same time there was also a pilot policy to develop direct payments to patients: personal health budgets. This was a system where sick people (or their parents) could receive a lump sum payment from the NHS which they could then allocate to the treatment of their choice. Whatever happened to that? Perhaps the drug companies thought too many people might opt for treatment that did not include their highly profitable drugs and vaccines.

So, 10 years on, patient choice has not advanced. It has been reversed. Politicians are no longer talking about patient choice. Indeed, they are more likely to be heard advocating mandatory drugging and vaccination policies. And this is the case even though 'patient choice' and 'personal health budgets' would resolve the problem.

So whatever the rights and wrongs of medical cannabis the current row is informative. It is still the conventional medical establishment that decides who can have what treatment. The patient can either accept their decision, do without, or bankrupt themselves by paying for it themselves.

Patients have absolutely no rights in health care.

 There is no health freedom.  

"All decisions about me without me". 

The doctor knows best. His decision is final.

Cannabis-Based Drugs for MS & Epilepsy. Now under control of Pharmaceutical Industry. So it's okay for NHS to prescribe them. What is the back story?

Two new Cannabis-based drugs, to treat epilepsy and MS, have been introduced by NICE and they will now be available on the UK's NHS. As usual, the introduction of these new drugs has been heralded by the mainstream media, charities and patient groups as 'long-overdue'.

Epidyolex is for children with two types of severe epilepsy, Lennox Gastaut syndrome, and Dravet syndrome. Both syndromes feature multiple seizures on a daily basis.

Sativex is a mouth spray that has been approved for treating muscle stiffness and spasms (spasticity) in MS (multiple sclerosis).

As usual, the two drugs were described by the media in glowing terms. Epidyolex, we were told, can reduce the number of seizures by up to 40% in some children, and this was confirmed by many parents who have been fighting for the drugs to be made available on the NHS. However, certain aspects of the story were not told, and perhaps will never be told if we rely on conventional medicine, and the mainstream media.

1. The Side Effects of the Drugs
The known side effects of the drugs were not mentioned. This is not unusual, of course. Introducing new 'wonder' drugs, and denying the harm they cause, is the strategy which maintains our faith in conventional medicine. But they are a matter of record in conventional medical literature.

• Epidyolex
• Sativex

So as usual the dangers of these drugs will not become known to non-doctors until a few more years down the line, when prescription will be increasingly restricted because of the harm they cause.

2. Why are the Drugs needed?
Conventional medicine undoubtedly needs the drugs. The number of children with life-threatening epilepsy syndromes is growing rapidly, as is MS. Both now affect unprecedented number of people. Both have become modern epidemics. And, as usual, conventional medicine has no effective or safe treatment for either.

So why do we have this need to treat so many new diseases? Why do so many people now suffer from these conditions? The problem with these "Why?" questions is that conventional medicine does not want to ask them. It's a disease; people are sick; and doctors have to provide treatment. It's that simple! Unfortunately it isn't!

• Epilepsy (seizures) are known to be caused by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.
• MS is known to be caused by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.
  

So doctors need these cannabis-based drugs for treating conditions they caused in the first place. These are iatrogenic diseases, another example of conventional medicine CAUSING disease with its drugs, and then coming up with new drugs to treat the sickness it caused in the first place.

3. The Cost of Drugs
This is, of course, a great business plan. Produce and sell a drug that causes disease; and then another drug that treats this iatrogenic disease, drugs which in turn cause more illness and disease. And pharmaceutical companies can charge incredible, mind-boggling sums for their drugs. Epidyolex, for instance, was approved for use in Europe in September 2019, but NICE initially said the drug was not good value for money as it cost between £5,000 and £10,000 per patient each year.

Sativex is reported to cost about £2,000 a year, per patient. It was licenced in 2014, and NICE said at this time that it was not cost effective. Now, it would seem, it is quite acceptable. For conventional medicine, of course, to have a drug is preferable to identifying the cause of an iatrogenic disease, at its source, and thereby eliminating it. There is no profit in that!

Remember these are drugs based on cannabis, basically a weed that costs very little to grow - but more of this later.
But the NHS has renegotiated these prices, so they are no longer deemed to be expensive. Quite how 'inexpensive' they have become remains unclear. We are not told. But it is a common business practice, in all industries, to ask for silly, exorbitant sums for a product, then to reduce the price so making it seem like a bargain.

4. The 'Active' Ingredients
These drugs are cannabis-based; they are not cannabis. Pharmaceutical companies have always isolated the 'active' ingredients of plants. Epidyolex, for instance, does not contain the main psychoactive component of cannabis, THC. Many parents of children with extreme epilepsy are paying many thousands of pounds each month for imported drugs that contain both THC, and another active ingredient, CBD. They have reduced the number and severity of seizures and they are furious that NICE has failed to approve cannabis-based medicines that contain both ingredients.

The reason for isolating the 'active' ingredient, especially of a plant-based drug, is that it gives the drug company control - over its production - and over its cost. If the active ingredient can be patented so much the better, they can charge even more. We are not dealing with herbalism here, we are dealing with a very Big Business - the pharmaceutical industry!


 5. Pharmaceutical Control
 Drug companies have a virtual monopoly within the NHS, as it does in most national health services throughout the world. And they fight to preserve their dominance. There have been a number of cases that demonstrate this, and I wrote about this one in 2014, and again in 2019.

• The parents of Ashya King fought to have their son, who suffered from cancer (probably caused by pharmaceutical drugs), treated with Proton Beam therapy, and were imprisoned and prosecuted because they removed him from a hospital in England. They disobeyed the conventional medical authorities, and paid the price.

The time that it has taken for cannabis-based drugs to be approved mirrors this situation. The drugs were unacceptable until such time that the conventional medical establishment were certain they were able to control the treatment. It's all about control, maintaining their dominant position. It is not about medical treatment, certainly not safe or effective medical treatment.

This is, of course, the same reason why the NHS hates homeopathy, and other natural medical therapies. They are not in control! Natural therapies will never be accepted within the NHS - because they may prove to be safer, and more effective than what they have to offer. And that would never do!

Cannabis as a Medical Treatment. The case of Billy Caldwell

Charlotte Caldwell is a mum from County Tyrone, Northern Ireland. Her 12 year old son, Billy, has very severe epilepsy, some days experiencing over 100 seizures. I will return to his condition at the end of the blog.

In a BBC Radio 5 Live interview Ms Caldwell said that conventional medicine had given Billy every imaginable drug, but none of them did anything for Billy's epilepsy. In 2017, she found cannabis oil. According to the Independent newspaper it was issued through a clinical trial in Toronto, Canada. It was prescribed by her family doctor, and cannabis oil reduced both the duration and intensity of Billy's fits, and has been doing so ever since.

A success story perhaps?

Not quite. Nothing is that easy with conventional medicine! For several months cannabis oil was prescribed by the family doctor, but then he was told by the Home Office to stop. Ms Caldwell brought cannabis oil from Canada, but this was confiscated at Heathrow airport earlier this week. She accused the Home Office as having "signed my son's death warrant". Later, the Home Office rejected her plea to legalise cannabis oil for her epileptic son, despite having what she described as a friendly meeting with a Home Office minister.

Apparently Billy was the first person in the UK to be prescribed cannabis oil, but in May (2018) his GP was told he could no longer do so by the Home Office. In doing so, Ms Caldwell felt that her son's death warrant had effectively been signed. It is, perhaps, easy to understand why she feels so strongly about the situation. She said that it was an “outrage” that UK parents should have to flee their own country to access life-saving treatment and urged the public not to confuse this issue up with the legalisation of recreational cannabis.

A Home Office spokeswoman came out with the usual bland and meaningless platitudes. They were "sympathetic to the rare situation that Billy and his family are faced with" but the Home Office stood by its position. It is unlawful to possess Schedule 1 drugs. The oil does not have a UK license. So it is illegal. Billy cannot have it.

So what is to be learnt from this situation. The issue of whether Cannabis should be proscribed, and  whether a proscribed drug that has medicinal benefits can be prescribed, will feature in most discussions on the situation. I will contribute little to this particular discussion, except that it would appear that conventional medicine is happy to prescribe dangerous pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines to children, regardless of their ineffectiveness, and their harmful side effects.

But Cannabis, which probably has less side effects that the anti-epileptic drugs he took earlier, cannot be prescribed. This certainly protects the pharmaceutical industry (who do not profit from Cannabis production), but it does not protect Billy, and other epileptic children whose epilepsy cannot be control with conventional medical treatment (of which more below).

What will almost certainly not be discussed is that Billy is yet another young child who has an illness for which conventional medicine has no effective treatment, and who parents look outside the UK for an answer. When an answer is found the conventional medical establishment objects, in this case fully supported by the Home Office. It would seem that the law, and professional medical ethics, is applied to such cases, and every time the needs of the patient, his/her health, and his family, is discounted.

This is conventional medical arrogance at it very worst. Charlie Gard, Alfie Dingley and Alfie Evans know all about this arrogance. Doctor's know best. They know about the drugs we can take, and those we cannot take. They know that our children need to be vaccinated, and if parents don''t agree they should be forced. Mandatory medicine is on the horizon. Doctors want us to accept what we are given, regardless of whether their drugs and vaccines are ineffective, or dangerous, or both, to our health.

So conventional medicine has decided. Billy can be given anti-epileptic drugs, despite the fact that they do not work, and despite the fact that they are know to have dangerous side effects. But Cannabis oil is not to be allowed. This also comes with side effect, according to Ms Caldwell. Are they as bad as anti-epileptic drugs? Who knows.

I would advise Ms Caldwell to consult with a homeopath in Northern Ireland, and seek treatment for Billy that is free of side effects, and which can be very effective. 

Yet there is another important question that will certainly never be discussed.

Why does Billy have severe epilepsy in the first place?
Indeed, why do so many young children have severe epilepsy today?

Epilepsy is caused by a large number of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. including Amphetamines, Antidepressants, Antipsychotics, Antibiotics, Painkillers, Asthma drugs, and many more. But when young children are involved it is always important to look at vaccines, and the side effects doctors know they can cause.

               The DPT Vaccine, given to children just a few months old, has spasms, seizure, coma and epilepsy as  'side effects'.

               The MMR Vaccine, given to children after they are over a year old, has febrile convulsions and seizures in their list of 'side effects'.

So I ask my usual question. It is one thing (unfortunately quite a common thing) for the conventional medical establishment to be unable to treat a condition, and even to refuse to offer a treatment they do not wish to use.

But it is quite another for the conventional medical establishment to CAUSE a condition, not to admit it, to have no effective treatment for the condition they created, and then to deny a patient a treatment they have found for themselves, especially when it appears to be working.

This is arrogance bordering on criminality!

EPILEPSY. Another drug is banned - after being 'widely prescribed' for over 50 years.

Conventional medicine does not protect patients from the harm caused by its pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.

Valporoate has just been banned by the UK's drug regulator, the MHRA (April 2018). Doctors have been instructed not to prescribe this epilepsy drug to any women of childbearing age, "unless they are on a pregnancy prevention programme". Doctors have also 'advised' not to prescribe the drug, also known as Epilim, or Episenta, or Depakote, for the treatment of migraine and bipolar disorder. So is this evidence that conventional medicine is protecting patients?

Hardly. The drug was discovered in 1882, and its 'anticonvulsant properties' in 1962. The pharmaceutical industry quickly obtained approval from French drug regulators in 1967 and Valproate quickly became the most widely prescribed epilepsy drug throughout the world.

So it has taken conventional medicine over 50 years to discover that Vaproate was a dangerous drug, and to take action to protect patients.

This tardiness is not untypical of conventional medicine, and their failure to protect patients. I have listed many pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that have been banned or withdrawn over the last 100 years and more. The same process is repeated, time and time again. A drug is found, it is quickly approved by drug regulators (whose main task is not to approve drugs but to protect patients from harm), used thereafter for many years, often many decades, and only accepted as 'dangerous' when this can no longer be denied. So is it possible that the conventional medical establishment did not realise that valproate was dangerous.

Hardly. The (appropriately entitled) health magazine, What Doctor's Don't Tell You (WDDTY) reported as long ago as April 2005 that pregnant women taking Valproate for their epilepsy were doubling the risk of their unborn child developing cognitive impairments.

Since then the evidence against Valproate has been building, but largely censored by the mainstream media (who have still, at the time of writing, to my knowledge, not reported the ban), and ignored by conventional medicine. So our doctors have continued to prescribe it regardless of the harm it has caused to patients. 

Doctors have been warned about the drug throughout the last 50 years - consistently. For example, on 13th October 2014 the GP magazine, Pulse, published an article "GP's advised not to prescribe valproate medicine to pregnant women". 

• There is little doubt that this dangerous drug has continued to be prescribed despite its dangers being well known within the conventional medical establishment.
• Nor can there be any doubt that over 50 years, many pregnant women have taken this drug, on the advice of their doctor, and many are now caring for children who were damaged by the drug.

So is it just pregnant women who are in danger from this drug? Hardly. Have a look at the Drugs.com website (now apparently owned by the pharmaceutical industry). They have posted these warnings about Valproate.

• This medicine may cause very bad and sometimes deadly liver problems. This most often happens within the first 6 months of using valproate injection...... 
• Children under 2 years are at greater risk of deadly liver problems.....
• There is a greater risk of liver failure and death in patients who have a genetic liver problem caused by a mitochondrial disorder.....
• This medicine may cause very bad birth defects if you take it while you are pregnant. It can also cause the child to have a lower IQ....
• If you are able to get pregnant, you must use birth control that you can trust while you take valproate injection......
• This medicine may cause very bad and sometimes deadly pancreas problems (pancreatitis). This may happen soon after use as well as many years after use.....

Then click on the linked 'side effects' page to see the full horror story of Valproate, and remember that this is a drug that conventional medicine has been quite happy to use for the last 50 years, and only now, only in the UK, has it been banned. This happens so frequently that no-one should consider any pharmaceutical drug or vaccine to be safe, regardless of what their doctors say.

If anyone, at this moment, is taking a pharmaceutical drug, be warned. The conventional medical establishment is not there for our safety, it is there to sell drugs - quite regardless of the harm they may cause us. The drug(s) YOU are taking, at THIS moment, may be the next drug that has to be banned!

Epilepsy and the use of Cannabis in Conventional Medicine

Conventional medicine likes to be in control! It dominates the NHS, it dominates our thinking about ill-health, its causes and treatments. Despite 'patient choice' being a key policy of all British political parties, and the government espousing the idea of 'no decision about me without me' in its 2010 White Paper on health, doctors continue to be arrogant enough to think they always know best!

There have been several cases in recent years when patients have wanted treatment but were thwarted by the NHS. And it would appear that there is another on its way.  This is the story, as I understand it.

A six-year-old boy, Alfie Dingley has a "rare and aggressive" form of epilepsy which causes multiple seizures. Apparently Alfie can have up to 30 fits daily, and in one single year suffered 3,000 seizures, and 48 hospital visits. The parents took their son to Holland where a cannabis-based treatment dramatically improved the situation. Whilst there Alfie went 24 days without an attack, and it has been estimate that with the treatment Alfie would only have about 20 seizures a year.

However, the parent's request for this treatment has been denied in the UK by the Home Office because cannabis remains illegal here.

Instead, the NHS offers Steroid injections, for which he has to go into hospital after each attack. As the mother says, correctly, these drugs can cause organ failure, especially with the amount Alfie has to take.

• Clearly, the Steroid treatment does not work to treat the condition.
• Clearly, the Cannabis treatment does work in Alfie's case.
• But to conventional medicine these simple observations appear to make little difference!

Homeopathy treats people with epilepsy, and does so more safely and effectively than any conventional treatment. This morning I checked my homeopathic repertory and there are over 250 remedies that are known to be successful. One of these is Cann-I, or Cannabis Indica. So homeopaths have known the value of Cannabis, and have been using it for a long time - for epilepsy, and many other conditions.

I notice that Alfie's mother says that Alfie's cannabis dose, made from the whole cannabis plant, was "very small" and that he was taking this in just three drops of the oil. This sounds like homeopathy, or something very similar.  It uses two homeopathic principles.

1. Using a substance that in its normal form can cause the condition - that is, treating like with like.
2. Using the substance in small, attenuated doses.

What it not doing, which homeopaths would do, is to dilute and succuss until there was nothing of the of the original substance left!

This situation is forcing the parents to raise money to take Alfie abroad to receive the treatment. This is a denial of human rights, the right to treat ourselves (and our children) in the way we think correct, and not according to the dictates of conventional medicine. And in order to get the treatment of their considered and informed choice, it is putting the family to unnecessary inconvenience and expense.

Yet this is typical of conventional medicine, which in choosing treatment for patients discounts 'patients outcome' almost entirely, and operates solely on the basis of the proof provided by 'medical science'. So steroids, dangerous as they are known to be, are okay because they have been tested by pharmaceutical companies. And Cannabis cannot be prescribed because of its addictive qualities, and because it has not been tested and approved by conventional medicine, and the pharmaceutical industry, who will not profit from its use.

This is not an isolated situation. In the USA it is becoming a serious issue. The Dr Mercola website published an article today which stated that the "Minnesota Governor Dayton Refuses to Legalize Medical Marijuana, Despite Parents’ Pleas". This article states that medical marijuana has been extensively studied, with positive results. 

               “To date, more than 15,000 modern peer-reviewed scientific articles on the chemistry and pharmacology of cannabis and cannabinoids have been published, as well as more than 2,000 articles on the body’s natural endocannabinoids. In recent years, more placebo-controlled human trials have also been conducted."

This Health Impact News article, "Medical Cannabis: the real reason the government wants to keep it banned" looks behind the scenes to the vested interests that do not want to allow patients access to the treatment. It's the usual stuff, covered so often in this blog! Vested interests, and governments cozying up to those vested interests, and a conventional medical profession prepared to use dangerous drugs rather than safer treatments - so long as they can make profits for the pharmaceutical industry.

Alfie's parents will not been told about homeopathy for the same reasons. It is a medical therapy that is readily available throughout the UK, but rarely offered to patients by the NHS who prefer patients to take dangerous drugs (even when they do no work) rather than look for alternative treatment. They prefer to force parents to go overseas for treatment rather than to offer simple, safer and more effective treatments in this country.

So my advice to Alfie's parents? Or indeed anyone else who is sick, and prescribed dangerous and ineffective treatment. Seek out a qualified homeopath in your local area (findahomeopath.co.uk) and see whether alternative medicine can offer treatment that is safer and more effective than conventional medicine.

Postscript
I have just heard another account of the situation, and have noticed that Alfie's condition has been described as "rare and aggressive". Whenever I hear that I immediately wonder if the illness has been caused by conventional medicine itself. It is well known that epilepsy is caused by a number of conventional  drugs and vaccines, including pharmaceutical drugs like Amphetamines, Anti-depressants, Anti-psychotics, Antibiotics, Painkillers, and many others.

I also heard that this 'rare and aggressive' condition did not start until Alfie was 8 months old. One of the biggest side effects of childhood vaccines are seizures, and this is the time when children have already received the DPT vaccine, and many have recently received the MMR vaccine. I do wonder if conventional medicine is not only reluctant to treat him, but are reluctant to examine whether vaccines, or some other pharmaceutical drug, is the cause.

DPT vaccine. Should you allow your baby to have it?

It would appear that it has been acknowledged that the DPT vaccine does cause Autism! At least the package insert of Tripedia, one DPT brand admits that Autism as been reported as an adverse reaction, alongside sudden infant death (SIDs), apnea, seizures up to and including epileptic 'gran mal' attacks, neuropathy and many mores

• DPT is the vaccine ALL our children are routinely given by our conventional doctors.
• DPT is the vaccine that our doctors have been telling us for years is safe for our children.
• DPT is one of the vaccines they want to make mandatory in many USA states, and elsewhere.
• DPT is one of the vaccines our mainstream media has refused to discuss for 12 year plus.

The fact that autism, sudden infant death, neuropathy, seizures, epilepsy might be bad enough, and a matter of considerable concern for parents who love their young babies.

Yet what is even more alarming is that young parents have not been told, and are not being told even now, about the link between the vaccine, and these dangerous and potentially lethal 'adverse reactions'.

I have seen a copy of the Tripedia package insert on this website - have a look for yourself.

• If there is a possible link should not the entire conventional medical establishment be concerned?
• Should there be more good quality research done into any possible link?
• If there is a possible link should parents be told by their doctors?
• If there is a possible link should the government not be warning us?
• If there is a possible link should the drug company not be warning us?
• If there is a possible link should the mainstream media not investigating, and telling us?

None of this is happening. Instead, as usual, there is silence. Well, it is on the package insert perhaps. But who ever sees the package insert? Doctors and nurses, perhaps, but not the child's parents.

Instead, we have to witness the ever increasing epidemic of autism sweeping the world.

Does the conventional medical establishment know what is causing this autism epidemic? Apparently not. This is the succinct summary given by the NHS Choices website.

          "The exact cause of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is currently unknown. It's a complex condition and may occur as a result of genetic predisposition (a natural tendency), environmental or unknown factors." 

And what treatment does the conventional medical establishment have for autism? NHS Choices is equally succinct about this too.

          "There's no 'cure' for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, a range of specialist educational and behavioural programmes can help children with ASD."

So what should parents of young babies consider when they are asked by their doctor to be allowed to give them the DPT vaccination? Three things....

1. Conventional medicine is a suspected cause of autism, and our doctors know this.
2. Conventional medicine says it does not know what causes autism, and fails to mention that one of their vaccines, has been linked with the condition.
3. Conventional medicine has no treatment for autism if you normal baby should contract the condition.

Instead, conventional medicine tells parents how they can 'live with autism'. In other words, the vaccine can cause autism, the link is denied, the epidemic continues, and parents just have to get on with it!

Does that sound like a good deal? Does that sound like an honest deal? Does that sound like a deal likely to lead to parents making an informed choice?

Conventional Medical Monopoly and Big Pharma Profiteering

The Competition and Markets Authority, the CMA, described as Britain's competition watchdog, has accused two pharmaceutical drug companies of "excessive and unfair" prices for an anti-epilepsy drug. So given my blog yesterday (5th August 2015) about a monopoly in NHS healthcare provision, another aspect of the consequences of allowing a monopoly comes to the fore.

It costs us.

It costs patients in terms of our health, and it costs taxpayers in our pockets.

Big Pharma's monopoly position within the NHS is, of course, supported by our mainstream media, who are willing not only to publicise their over-hyped claims for their drugs and vaccines, but giving us with the impression that these drugs and vaccines are the route to good health, and that 'there is no alternative' to them.

The monetary cost of conventional drugs and vaccines are excessive, and they have been for a very long time. I recall, some years ago, when a drug company, which was facing huge compensation payments for the damage caused by one of their drugs, stated that these payments were not a problem as they were 'factored in' to the cost of every drug.

That is, drug companies are aware that their drugs will cause damage to patients, that the courts will fine them heavily, but they charge enough for the drugs to pay compensation!

What this means is that pharmaceutical companies can charge whatever they like for their drugs and vaccines. They operate within a monopoly. "There is no alternative"!

Normally, drug companies profit from the patents taken out on their drugs. A patent is a device that ensures that the inventor is guaranteed profit by removing all competition. Usually, the pharmaceutical industry justifies these excessive profits by pointing to the huge costs of developing a new drug or vaccine.

But this is not the case here. Phenytoin was first discovered in 1908!

The drug Phenytoin is currently prescribed to 50,000 people in Britain. It is manufactured by Pfizer, and marketed by Flynn Pharma. The drug, previously called Epanutin, used to cost the NHS £2.3 million per year. In 2013 it cost £50 million.

How did they do it?

The clue is in the sentence above. The name of the drug was changed! This is a popular device used by the pharmaceutical industry. They do it in order to obfuscate, to confuse, to pull the wool over the eyes of both doctors and patients. So, when one of their drugs or vaccines is found to be dangerous, they change the name, and call it something else.

For instance , the drug Thalidomide, perhaps the most infamous drug ever given to unsuspecting patients, is now called Thalomid, and is being prescribed to patients to treat cancer and leprosy.

Yet now, it would appear, when the Big Pharma industry wants to make bumper profits from sick people, they change the name of the drug, in this case from Epanutin to Phenytoin.

Actually, there should have been no such confusion. According to Wikipedia (never an entirely reliable, or unbiased source of information, but adequate in this instance) the drug, first discovered in 1908, was initially known then as Phenytoin. It was called Epanutin later. The name changed back more recently when Pfizer sold the British marketing rates to Flynn Pharmacy. And certainly, the increase in price was known to Wikipedia, if not to the NHS, some time ago.

     "The capsules are still made by Pfizer's Goedecke subsidiary's plant in Freiburg, Germany and they still have Epanutin printed on them. After Pfizer's sale of the UK marketing licence to Flynn Pharma, the price of a 28-pack of 25 mg phenytoin sodium capsules marked Epanutin rose from 66p to £15.74. Capsules of other strengths also went up in price by the same factor - 2384% costing the UK's National Health Service an extra £43 million (about $68.44 million) a year.

So what is the NHS paying for, and what are the consequences for British patients? Well, that is quite another story! Wikipedia tells us that in 2008, the drug was put on the FDA's "Potential Signals of Serious Risks" list! So what are these 'serious risk', for which we are paying so much to acquire? They are many and varied (and these are taken from a Wikipedia list)!

• severe low blood pressure, and abnormal heart rhythms.
• double vision, slurred speech, cerebellar ataxia, tremor.
• status epilepticus on sudden withdrawal.
• atrophy of the cerebellum.
• megaloblastic anaemia, aplastic anaemia, decreased white blood cell count, low platelet count.
• birth defects, 'metal hydantoin syndrome.
• gingival enlargement of the mouth.
• Hypertrichosis, Stevens-John syndrome, purple glove syndrome, rash, exgoliative dematitis, itching, excessing hairiness, coarsening of facial features.
• Lupus.
• Suicidal thoughts and behaviour.
• Decreased bone density and increased bone fractures.

So why have the FDA not acted on these 'serious risks'? 

So why did the NHS not spot that they were being overcharged by 2,384%?

So why do conventional doctors still prescribe such a dangerous, and hugely expensive drug?

So how can pharmaceutical companies continue to get away with profiteering from a drug they know can cause such serious harm to patients?

It is all connected with the monopoly of conventional, drug-based medicine, within the NHS.

It is time that the monopoly is challenged, that alternative therapies, such as homeopathy, are asked by the NHS if they can do better (both in terms of outcomes and cost) than the pharmaceutical industry in treating disease. It is time that the conventional medical monopoly is challenged, and patients are given a proper choice about how their illnesses are treated in future.

"First do no harm". A test Conventional Medicine regularly fails

Primum non nocere, or "First do no harm" is supposed to be a central feature of medical practice, enshrined within the Hippocratic Oath. Regular readers of this blog will know that conventional, drug/vaccine dominated medicine flouts this rule all the time, often with disastrous effects on our health and well-being.

Yet "First do no harm" is also a film made in 1997, starring Meryl Streep. It is a film about a young boy who develops epilepsy, and the efforts of his mother to seek safer and more effective treatment for him after conventional medical treatment proves to be not only ineffective, but seriously harmful, dangerous and life-threatening.

This is a well-known, and oft-repeated situation. Most people will probably have witnessed something similar with people they know after the medical treatment. 

The patient starts with a simple, often trivial complaint, and they take conventional drugs to treat it (or vaccines to prevent it), and far from being a benefit, the 'side-effects' of the treatment actually causes more serious harm to health, and more serious illness. (See my ebook, Drug Induced Illness).

So it is interesting to follow the progression of this particular story, which is based on actual events.

The reason for Robbie (the child) developing epilepsy is not mentioned. Epilepsy is known to result from a simple Vitamin D deficiency. Or it can be caused by stress. But conventional pharmaceutical drugs, like cough medicines, anti-histamines, antidepressants and antibiotics, are also known to cause epilepsy!

Diagnosis

Robbie is subjected to a variety of tests - a CT scan, a lumbar puncture, and an electroencephalogram, and he is diagnosed with epilepsy.

The problems with the diagnosis of epilepsy is that is is notoriously unreliable. The British Medical Journal reported in 2003 (326: 355) that epilepsy was misdiagnosed in about one-third of cases. It is interesting to note what what the magazine, What Doctors Don't Tell (WDDTY) said about this BMJ article:

"Neither report highlighted the terrible drug regimen that follows an epilepsy diagnosis.  So powerful are the anti-epileptics that some children have died while on them. To know that their child never had epilepsy in the first place may be too much for some parents to bear.

Antiepileptic Drugs

Immediately, drugs were prescribed for Robbie, beginning with Phenobarbital. This is an 'old' anticonvulsant drug with well known  Disease-Inducing-Effects (DIEs), including cognitive impairment and behaviour problems.

When this drug failed he is moved on to Phenytoin (Dilantin), a drug known to cause decreased co-ordination, mental confusion, and many other serious DIEs. For a list of the serious DIEs caused by this drug, click here.

Then, when this drug did not work, he was given Carbamazepine (Tegretol). The DIEs of this drug are probably even worse, and a list can be found by clicking here.

It is not just that these drugs did not work. Ineffectiveness is certainly one common feature of conventional medical drugs. But causing actual bodily harm, and serious harm to health, is another. After each drug it becomes quite clear that Robbie's health is actually getting worse, and that the cause of this deterioration was his medication. His epilepsy gets worse, and he develops a serious rash, known as Stevens-Johnson syndrome. 

The parents begin to understand that their son may become a vegetable as a result of the drugs he is being given, particularly when he goes into 'status epilepticus' - a continuous convulsive seizure that had to be stopped as a medical emergency. This was done by giving Robbie increasing doses of Diazepam (Valium) even though it does no good, even when given intravenously!

Eventually he is given Paraldehyde. In the film this drug is said to have possible fatal 'side-effects', and was seen to dramatically melt a plastic cup in which it had been placed! On this website, one of the DIEs is given as convulsions!

At some point we really should be asking what this medicine is all about, and whether the doctors who are using it really know what they are doing!

The failure of drugs led the neurologist in the film to suggest that Robbie should have surgery, involving the removal of the top of his skull, and inserting electrodes on the surface of the brain - to get a more accurate location of any seizure focus. His mother is aghast.

Meryl Streep, the mother, undertakes some library study, and through this discovers another treatment - the Ketogenic Diet. She suggests this to the neurologist, who says 'there is no evidence' to support it. By this the doctor meant that there have been no Randomised, Controlled Tests (RCTs) undertaken on it. The treatment, she said, was supported only by 'anecdotal' evidence - by which she meant that although individuals have been cured by the diet the drug companies had not carried out RCTs on it, and so, for the neurologist this was not 'evidence.

Later in the film, the neurologist was reminded of the uncomfortable fact that there were no RCTs on many of the drug treatments she had already used for Danny!

There is, of course, lots of money involved in peddling pharmaceutical drugs, but few profits, if any, for cures which involve diet. So such alternatives are not favoured by the conventional medical establishment.

Robbie's mother determines to get her son to the John Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, where the Ketogenic diet was being used.

First she tried to secrete him out of the hospital, but was stopped, and warned that by doing this she could risk losing custody of her son, as the courts (heavily influenced by 'conventional medical advice' of course, might believe she is putting her son's health at risk by refusing conventional medical treatment.

However, with the help of a retired doctor, and a sympathetic nurse (far more help than would be available to the average parent) she does manage to take Robbie to Baltimore, and he is given the Ketogenic diet. The seizures begin to improve, and are eventually eliminated, and his mental faculties are restored.

Apparently the factual basis of this story arises from the experience of the film's editor, and the main question is asked was why he was not told about this treatment. He was apparently outraged that nobody had informed him of the diet, even when it was clear that the drugs were not working.

The Ketogenic diet was first develop by Russell Wilder, at the Mayo Clinic, in 1921. Although it was initially popular, it decline when new, 'effective' drugs (like Phenytoin) were discovered in the later 1930s, early 1940's  - that is, the drugs that were used in the film with Robbie! 

Wikipedia claims that, since the film, the diet is now being used in 75 epilepsy centres, in 45 countries. However, NHS Choices have a different story to tell!

"Anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) are usually the first choice of treatment. About 70% of people with epilepsy have their seizures controlled with AEDs".

So let it never be said that the NHS, our doctors, and the Conventional Medical Establishment generally, do not use drugs whenever there is an opportunity to do so! Moreover, let us observe here that even when there are safer and more effective alternatives that can be used, drugs still remain the preferred option! Indeed, diet is mentioned on NHS Choices almost as an after-thought!

"Sometimes, a special diet is used for children whose seizures are difficult to control and do not respond to drug treatment.

Patients seeking treatment within the Conventional Medical Establishment - beware!

FACs. Fetal Anti-Convulsant Syndrome. A disease created by Big Pharma drugs?

Some years ago, I came across a family with two children suffering from this syndrome. This 'new' illness has affected 37,500 children in Britain, according to the British Epilepsy Association. FACS produces a range of neural, behavioural, and physical disorders, and can include conditions such as cleft palate and spina bifida, learning difficulties, behavioural problems and abnormalities in movement, speech, vision and hearing.

So what is FACS, and where does it come from? 

Yet another new, strange and rare disease with no known cause? Well, not really, the cause is well known. 

These children were damaged in the womb when the mother had taken anti-convulsant drugs, such as Epilim and Carbamazepine.

So FACS is, in fact, another conventional medical 'mistake', another disaster for parents and families where the 'science' of drug testing and drug regulation has proven to be no safeguard to public safety. At the time of writing, this condition has had little publicity, but this, in itself, is something that should be a matter of public concern. 

1. *Why are we not being told about such disease? 
2. *What is preventing this information becoming more widely known?

Janet Williams, who has two sons affected by FACS, founded the Organisation for Anti-Convulsant Syndrome (OACS). She says:

          "We want to hear from any family with a child with problems whose mother took any anti-epileptic drug in pregnancy".

She goes on to say that many of these children have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). What do the drug companies say about it? Well, the usual denials.

* Anti-epileptic drugs are vital to the health of people with epilepsy, who should not stop taking them without consulting their doctor (so it is a balancing act again, weighing up the 'benefits' and the 'risks' of taking drugs).

* Health authorities regularly routinely and continually review the safety of all licensed medications (including, presumably, these drugs, so no comfort for the children or their parents who suffer from FACS).

* That warnings were given about valproate (the basic ingredient of epileptic drugs) in respect of possible effects in children born to mothers taking the product during pregnancy, and that "this information was approved by the regulatory authorities as consistent with current scientific knowledge" (which suggests that the dangers of the drugs were known to medical authorities, but they were prescribed to patients anyway).

This is just one example of how the Conventional Medical Establishment, with their drug-based medicine, are actually creating illness.

Epilim; a dangerous drug, but no legal redress for families

Dozens of families who blame an epilepsy drug, Epilim, for causing birth defects in their children (see information on FACs) say they are devastated that legal aid to sue its maker has been withdrawn. So says a BBC report at:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11707386

What is important in this story is not just that no patient is safe taking ConMed drugs, but that drug companies don't admit that their drugs have done anything 'wrong', and, in the UK, the government does not enable families to take such matters to the courts. There is little justice.

So it would seem that UK patients have to be even more careful than those in the USA. In the USA, 'class actions' against drug companies are regularly passing through the legal system, so at least those who have suffered disease and death have some access to justice, and drug companies have been forced to pay many $billions in compensation for the suffering and distress they cause.

The families concerned have children that have suffered because Epilin by the mother during pregnancy. This has caused their children to be born with spina bifida, heart damage and learning difficulties. Their lives have been devastated by ConMed drugs.

And it would appear that in the UK the drug companies, the government, and the NHS are not prepared to take any responsibility.