Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: 20 Million Children Drugged

Posted 9 years ago on Feb. 22, 2012, 1:53 p.m. EST by PeaceNow (84)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Big Pharma sucks!

this is really good for kids and adults who have been pigeon holed!!!!

20 Million Children Drugged

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEYgnxBTAiI&feature=g-u-u&context=G2a15205FUAAAAAAAAAA

20 Comments

20 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by ARod1993 (2420) 9 years ago

Based on what I can see the problem is not that "Big Pharma" is pure evil, or even that its model is particularly unorthodox for large corporations, but rather that healthcare isn't an arena for which the corporate model really works all that well. Big Pharma is merely following one of the major tenets of sales maximization: individual markets are finite, and so if you want to grow sales beyond a certain degree you're going to need to expand into new markets.

Basically, a number of different factors including but hardly limited to the decline of the stay-at-home parent and the slow-motion collapse of our school system, we have a large number of kids who are different in some way, and at times those differences can be disruptive. Actually looking at patterns of disruptive behavior, getting to the root cause of these patterns, and fixing that root cause is difficult and time-consuming at best for a family to do, especially with two working parents (and if the family is part of the problem then forget it).

Once drugs like Ritalin were invented and studied, the group of children I outlined above became the perfect market to expand into, and once the children with legitimate psychiatric issues were on long-term prescriptions, it came time to start slowly expanding the definition of "psychiatric issues" to keep revenues growing. Your kid can't sit still in class? Here's a pill for that. Your kid gets into fights at school? Here's a pill for that. Your kid has an eerily overactive imagination? Well, you're in luck; the pill for that just came out yesterday.

The fun part about all this is that it's not a conspiracy. There's no evil government trying to poison its citizens, no Rothschild cabal or Illuminati trying to soften people up for the advent of the New World Order, no reptilians waging an opium war on our children. This is simply standard corporate practice when selling a good, only now the good in question is healthcare.

This is one of the unforeseen side effects of corporatizing healthcare (a move which I will always believe was a serious mistake), and on some level we as a society need to reaccustom ourselves to the idea that there is not always a pill for that (regardless of what "that" happens to be this week), and on some level we need to divorce healthcare from the corporate model.

[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 9 years ago

rod, I do agree with most of your points but I think/know that this issue has much deeper roots grounded in very serious corruption that has gotten worse and is still getting worse. Just because a corporation is a corp. doesn't mean that it will be a corrupt corp. It's a mistake for us to assume that corruption should be second nature to business practice and tolerate it. Drug companies and other human health related industries should hold themselves to a higher standard than car salemen and should operate with extreme ethics given that human lives are being affected. I also believe/know that the drug companies DO conspire to skew data and drug certain numbers of the population without any concern as to whether someone really needs the drug. If there isn't a market, they will create one by creating a syndrome for anything under the sun. This is not ethical by any means and yet we've become very accepting of these catch all diagnoses. As it's become more known that the drug companies have conspired this way to push drugs to market consumer confidence and trust has diminished and why vaccines have become more and more popular over the last 5 or so years since it's easier to drug larger numbers of the population with those ' necessary' drugs. Even President Bush mandated after 9-11 that he wanted 250,000 Americans put on antidepressants by the end of December 2001. How can anyone mandate drugging based on an ' assumption'? I know why he did that but it was completely irresponsible and very dangerous. The drugging of children became popular when cuts were made in education. Again this was one of Bush's genius ways to cut the cost of education by drugging children into complacency, increasing the size of classrooms, paying fewer teachers less money and implementing the SOL test for dummies. This is what he called, ' No Child left Behind'.
Read Gwen Olsen's book and watch her video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4bYng7X7Kk She is a former drug pusher and there are many just like her who will gladly tell you the truth about what goes on in their boardrooms.

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 9 years ago

I don't in any way, shape, or form mean to condone this sort of thing, and if it sounded like I did I apologize for misleading you. My point is that pills can't be treated like toys or cars (where a company can drum up a market where there was none before) and that somebody with actual power has to keep reminding Big Pharma of that or we're all screwed. There needs to be some sort of advisory body completely separate from (no money, no shared personnel, etc.) all pharmaceutical companies performing the trials on these pills and then determining if they have enough therapeutic value to go on the market.

[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 9 years ago

I knew what you were saying and I agreed except that the drug companies do drum up their own markets all the time by creating diseases/syndromes. Plus their medicines create a domino effect creating the need for other medicines, more medicines. There are always going to be people who want relief from whatever ails them. Years ago, the FDA conducted independent research but Bush took that power away from them too. I can remember when it took 20 plus years to get a drug approved and now it takes months. I don't know how to solve this problem because big pharma is ' too big to fail' and too tied to our leadership and FDA. The only thing I can recommend and this is probably not very realistic is that people quit relying on drugs for conditions that don't really require them...like colds, flu, weight gain, sore muscles, etc.. I don't do meds anymore and learned to take better care of myself by finding a doctor that practices integrative medicine and preventive medicine. It's made a huge difference. I don't have insurance either. I know that more folks are realizing that medicine is failing us on so many levels and are trying safer and natural remedies but many are still stuck in that ' the doc will fix everything' with pills.

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (331) 9 years ago

No drug gets through Phase 1, 2, and 3 in a few months. More like many expensive tough years of trials. The failure rate is quite high. While there are publicized problems after approvals, i believe we still have the safest pharmaceuticals in the world. One other point: parents play a large role in the decision of pharmaceutical usage on children. I believe the same mentality that we see with the over use of pacifiers is the same as lack of some parenteral patience with children's self control issues.

[-] 1 points by alexrai (851) 9 years ago

Parents get part of the blame for sure, but doctors should be doing a bit more independent research, and a bit less accepting kickbacks.

There are a few too many problems after approvals IMO, you never know if its gonna be coma, or weather your femur is going to spit in half... but its always something. I tend to avoid doctors, but I'd be leery about using anything that hasn't been out for 10 years.

As I understand "phase 3" testing, that means a "test" on the general population does it not? Like if you are buying a new drug, you are essentially paying to participate in a large scale study?

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (331) 9 years ago

Phase 3 is the larger of the studies, and the test subject number can vary by quite a bit, depending on design of the test protocol and drug target. But it is still before aproval. You may be thinking of phase 4 testing which is really monitoring all reactions, complaints and other possible indications that might be encountered to gather data on. It is quite a complicated process. No testing is performed without consent during the pre-approval phases. I understand your concerens of using pharmaceuticals but they have probably extended or saved the lives of most people on this planet. As a disclaimer, I worked in big pharma as an engineer for 32 years.

[-] 1 points by alexrai (851) 9 years ago

Well I'd have to admit anti-biotics have probably saved my life on a couple of occasions, but generally I try and avoid pharms unless I really really need them... :/

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 9 years ago

It's not only parents but schools. I know several parents who have been forced to drug their kids since the schools have police power over such matters. If direct to consumer advertising would be banned that would help reduce a lot of over prescribing. And yes, I agree, parents are very agreeable in some cases because they are told that these meds will make their life easier. A lot of parents take their kid's meds too. It's a real problem today.
It's been discovered that MANY drugs never went through phase 3 trials so I disagree with you.

[-] 1 points by engineer4 (331) 9 years ago

Yes, I do agree that when pharmaceutical advertising was approved years ago, things changed and over prescribing got worse. And yes, I think schools also play a role in this, but that is a whole other subject, especially when these identified kids are placed into "special programs" just to get more advantages (or funds). There is a fast track process for certain drugs but am not aware of any drug not in all the phased process.

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 9 years ago

There were some SSRI's that never completed phase 3 testing...Paxil was one of them I believe and this was discovered during investigations. They also withheld the mortality rates related to Paxil and Vioxx. The drug companies shouldn't be testing their own products AND the FDA is hardly their watchdog anymore. It's quite easy for pharma companies to lie when they strike deals with their babysitter to do the same. It's not just the pharma companies that operate this way. I was an environmental toxicologist and conducted testing for large corps as an independent scientist but then in the early 90's these corps wanted to conduct their own testing and hired me to train their employees. We all know the reason why they would prefer in-house testing, right? Many of my associates caved and began operating much like the FDA. EPA is almost as bad as FDA. It's really easy to over-look the corruption when there are so many divisions in corps that perform a specialized task.
I wanted to ask you why specifically you believe America's pharma meds are safer than any other country's. I would agree with you if it were 20 or more years ago but I don't today mainly because we import a lot of medicines from other countries like China, India. Yes, we do have very strict regulations ( when they are followed) but thanks to global trade, our sovereignty, food safety and drug safety is terribly compromised and safety monitoring has become increasingly difficult. I think Americans should be very concerned. Oh and we also have the greed factor at the local pharmacy too where some pharmacists will actually alter/dilute the medicines to save money. I don't believe there is any safe drug and that's why I " Just Say NO!! :D

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 9 years ago

Here's a very good documentary on drugging children by Gary Null.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-drugging-of-our-children/

Gary Null has testified before Congress many times and videos of his testimony are also on youtube. Just do a search for Gary Null

[-] -2 points by tomahawk99 (-26) 9 years ago

such a wide brush stroke. big pharma sucks?. Next time you go to a doctor or emergency room make sure that you tell them not to use any drugs developed or produced by any 'big pharma' corporation. Oh and also tell any friends with AIDs not to use 'Big Pharma' drugs.

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 9 years ago

Let's not split hairs here. Most people know how corrupt and dangerous big pharma is. There's most always a safer, more natural solution which is what I choose.
But, I agree with Peace that big pharma sucks because I know first hand their broken research ethics, their deliberate disease mongering, their unholy ties with FDA and our legislators, the AMA, big insurance and their reckless delivery of drugs that have not been proven safe.( since they go to market and use us as their unsuspecting guinea pigs)..oh and let's not forget their deliberate attempts to deceive everyone with their deliberately skewed ' evidence-based' studies. No other industry can kill at least 55,000, injured more than 150,000 americans and killed more than 165,000 world wide with one drug and walk away with a few lawsuits and a slap on the wrist.

Q: Who killed more Americans —al Qaeda crashing airplanes into the World Trade Center, or Merck pushing Vioxx?

A: Merck, by a factor of 18.

Only in America is this tolerated. In China, if drug company executives or FDA execs are charged with fraud , they are killed immediately. There is ZERO tolerance.

[-] -3 points by tomahawk99 (-26) 9 years ago

so let me get this straight you like the way communist China operates? come on ,china sucks. would you trust any of their medicine even the food there? And comparing al Queda and Merck? that's disgusting shame on you, you terrorist loving traitor.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 9 years ago

This comment, is simply naive.

We already are stuck with trusting China for the things you mention, and more.Have you been sleeping, or tuned in to FLAKESnews?

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 9 years ago

Yep, it's just another bored juvenile who feels the need to play devil's advocate. No biggie He probably skipped a dose of his meds.

[-] 0 points by Rennaye (34) 9 years ago

The Pharma-Cartel is almost entirely owned by the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. Same pieces of shit that own the banking industry. They're just legalized drug pushers.

Here's a little history about the Pharma-Cartel.

http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/open_letters/pharma_laws_history.html

[-] 0 points by tomahawk99 (-26) 9 years ago

like i'm going to believe someone who says big pharma is almost entirely owned by the Rothschilds. Do you also believe in big foot , that communism works, and that Iran is a nice country?

[-] 0 points by Rennaye (34) 9 years ago

ALERT : Coginitve Infiltrater