Thalidomide, DEET, swine flu, apples, oranges, goats, chickens, etc.

[Guest guest]

We were having a vigorous discussion over at DailyBrief group over

things like saefty of swine flu vaccine, etc., and people were

questioning the credibility of my sources like naturalnews.com and

mercola.com. Here's my magnus opus of a response . . .

 

robert-blau(Robert Blau) Wed, Sep 9, 2009,

4:44pm dailybrief

Thalidomide, DEET, swine flu, apples, oranges, goats, chickens,

etc.

 

1) Thalidomide: Yes, ironically, after ALL that, I MISSPELLED

thalidomide. I'm used to talking about AMides, which, actually,

thalidomide IS -- except that it's a DOUBLE one, which makes it an

IMide. The trade name is a modification of " pthalimide " (i.e., imide of

pthalic acid).

 

2) DEET -- apples and oranges?/squids and squirrels?: The issue at hand

is NEUROTOXICITY. Are you aware that parathion and malathion, which are

chief ingredients of insecticides, are ALSO chief ingredients of nerve

gas used on humans? The mechanism is the same -- the disruption of the

transmission of nerve impulses across synapses.

 

SO, even INSECTS and humans aren't necessarily apples and oranges when

it comes to things like neurotoxicity and other disruptions of basic

cellular processes.

 

More on DEET:

 

Popular Insect Repellent Deet Is Neurotoxic

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090804193230.htm

 

Epidemiologic Notes and Reports Seizures Temporally...

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00001475.htm

 

ATSDR - DEET - Health Effects in Humans

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/consultations/deet/health-effects.html

 

Increased neurotoxicity following concurrent...

exposurehttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8954750?log%24=activity

 

Industry " experts " dispute negative conclusions, of course. But, bottom

line: Is it prudent public policy to make ROUTINE (as opposed to

exigent) use of even POTENTIALLY dangerous substances when simple,

cheap, and effective natural alternatives are available? [My answer:

Sure -- in the Bizarro Universe.]

 

3) Credibility of sources: Mercola.com sells health products! So what,

really? Would you prefer to rely on statements from executives from,

say, Pfizer, which recently was fined 2.3 BILLION dollars for

" misbranding the anti-inflammatory arthritis drug Bextra 'with the

intent to defraud or mislead.' " Google the name of any other

pharmaceutical company along wih the word " fine " or " convicted " and see

what you find -- including serious environmental violations.

 

Other points which might be more significant and relevant to the issue

of credibility and reliability: Do you know where most FDA regulators

and administrators go after they leave the agency? Answer: To

high-paying jobs at the pharmaceutical companies they previously were

charged with overseeing. Do you think that their future career plans

might have ANY effect on their objectivity while at the agency? (If your

answer is " No " , I have a special this week on a bridge in a well-known

Eastern borough.)

Also, were you aware that a large proportion of studies on drug safety

by " independent " agencies are ACTUALLY funded by drug companies, and

that they tend to defund in the middle studies that are going against

them, or try to bury the results afterward?

 

4) Swine flu vaccine:

 

Frames the issues pretty well:

Vaccine May Be More Dangerous Than Swine Flu, by Russell Blaylock, M.D.

http://www.nowpublic.com/health/vaccine-may-be-more-dangerous-swine-flu

 

At the end of the day: One can quibble till the cows come home over any

particular study or source. If you spend any time reading scientific

journals, you'll be inclined to conclude that it's next to impossible to

prove ANYTHING in the life sciences. (Think about how long it took to

prove that smoking causes cancer.)

 

Whom and what do you believe? I would submit that reasonable and prudent

public policy should be based on the preponderance of evidence and

experience over the long-run AND the principle of " First do no harm. "

 

The record of the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry over the last

half-century is poor to say the least. The death rate from RECOMMENDED

use of prescription drugs is at least DOUBLE that of highway fatalities.

(Over 100,000 per year in hospitals ALONE according to JAMA.) It seems

that as if every other week you hear a news report about how last year's

" wonder drug " against everything from arthritis to obesity has now been

found to be killing people in large numbers, or seriously damaging their

hearts, livers, etc. Can you spell V-I-O-X-X? [Got THAT one right  

]. (The evidence BTW is that Merck concealed what they KNEW about its

harmfulness for a significant period of time.)

 

I've been told that there's a saying in the medical field: " The only

'safe' drug is a new one. " Think about what that means.

 

The typical American over the age of fifty is on about a half dozen

prescription drugs. Why do you think that the Medicare drug benefit and

access to cheap drugs from Canada were such big issues?

[When I went in for a preadmission interview prior to cataract surgery a

few years back, the nurse was GENUINELY amazed when I answered " None " to

" What prescription drugs do you take? " ] People go to their physician

with a health problem and are given a drug which just suppresses the

symptom temporarily without curing the underlying condition -- and then

have to come BACK when their condition worsens and/or they develop

" side-effects " . Then they're given TWO new drugs. This cycle continues

in a downward spiral of deterioration.

 

The harm done by prescription drugs plus their cost is a major burden on

our health system. Any " health care reform " that fails to address it is

just changing the paperwork (like rearranging the deck chairs on the

Titanic).

 

When you do a real analysis of the FDA or CDC's own numbers, the swine

flu vaccine would be just as likely to harm people as to save them.

Again, IS it prudent public policy to use a heavy-headed, unproven, and

even POTENTIALLY dangerous approach like mass vaccination when simple,

cheap, and effective natural alternatives (which, BTW have only POSITIVE

" side-effects " ) are available? I can cure most flu cases with ordinary

hydrogen peroxide, for crying out loud.