New Bio-Security Designation:
Three (3) Stories Below:
1. LATEST TELEVISION COMMERCIALS IN
THE U.S.A. FOR PSYCHOTROPIC PILLS & NEW ZEALAND
"LEMONS"
Drug: XARELTO (Rivaroxaban)
(S)-5-chloro-N-{[2-oxo-3-[4-(3-oxomorpholin-4-yl)
phenyl]oxazolidin-5-yl]methyl} thiophene-2-carboxamide
Television Commercial Features American Man Pointing To
New Zealand Tourism Poster, Then Shown In The South Island,
And A Shot With Some Penguins.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF YANKS ARE TOTALLY MEDICATED
ON PSYCHOTROPICS, ON PILL OR ANOTHER
PUSHED BY U.S. PILL MAKERS
'RIVAROXABAN'
RIVER-TOXIC-CAN = 3 EYED FISH IN U.S.A.
RIVER-TOXIC-CAN = AMPHIBIANS ALSO CHANGING SEXES
TOXIC AMERICAN YANKS ENTERING NEW ZEALAND
DRUG ADDICT YANKS WITH URINE AND FECES
AND POLLUTING OUR WATERWAYS
AND KILLING OFF THE OCEAN LIFE
WITH AMERICAN PSYHOTROPICS
WITH AMERICAN MEDICATIONS
JUST AS THE OCEAN LIFE AND WATERWAYS IN
AMERICA ARE TOXIC
STAY THE PHUCK OUT OF NEW ZEALAND YOU
OVER-MEDICATED PSYCHOTROPIC ZOMBIE YANKS !
2. BIG PHARMA PUSHES DRUG TO 'CURE RACISM'
http://www.prisonplanet.com/big-pharma-pushes-drug-to-cure-racism.html
(text below)
Medical establishment seeks to chemically castrate ‘aberrant thoughts’
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, March 15, 2012
As part of the headlong rush towards a Brave New World society, the
establishment is feverishly pushing pharmaceutical drugs that chemically
castrate an individual’s ‘aberrant thoughts’, with the latest proposal
claiming that people can be given a drug to “cure” racism.
A study conducted by Oxford University experimental psychologist Dr Sylvia
Terbeck into the heart disease drug Propranolol, published in the journal
Psychopharmacology, found that the drug “may have the unusual side-effect of
combating racism.”
“Volunteers given the beta-blocker, used to treat chest pains and lower
heart rates, scored lower on a standard psychological test of “implicit”
racist attitudes,” reports the Telegraph. “They appeared to be less racially
prejudiced at a subconscious level than another group treated with a “dummy”
placebo pill.”
The test subjects were shown images of people of different races along with
positive and negative words. They were also asked to rate how “warm” their
feelings were to different groups. Results showed that participants on the
drug were more likely to be “biased towards being non-racist at a
subconscious level” compared to those taking the placebo.
“Such research raises the tantalising possibility that our unconscious
racial attitudes could be modulated using drugs, a possibility that requires
careful ethical analysis,” said Co-author Professor Julian Savulescu, from
Oxford University’s Faculty of Philosophy.
By arguing that the widespread use of antidepressants like Prozac has
established the ethical foundation of using drugs to alter thought patterns
and behavior, scientists contend that “manipulating morals” through
“pharmacologically-induced altruism” should also be acceptable.
And they’re right – it is acceptable – but only if you wish to create a
society along the lines of Aldous Huxley’s fictional scientific dictatorship
in his 1932 dystopian novel Brave New World. In the book, the consumption of
the drug soma is universally endorsed by the ‘World State’ in order to
destroy individuality, which is frowned upon as a mental illness, and
eliminate the need for personal allegiances to religion or anything beyond
the state itself.
Drugging people to “cure” their racism would also empower the establishment
to define what ideological or political thoughts are aberrant and dangerous.
Of course, slavish devotion to the authorities would not be one of them.
“It is scary to think that it is considered morally obnoxious to call
someone a derogatory name, but absolutely fine to drug people into complying
with a political ideology. What ever happened to ‘I disagree with you
opinion but I’d defend to the death your right to say it’?” writes D Holt.
As we highlighted earlier this week, it’s not just the pharmaceutical
establishment pushing for this, top professors at major universities are
also big advocates.
New York University bioethics professor S. Matthew Liao wrote a paper in
which he promoted the use of pharmacological drugs to make people more
environmentally sensitive so that they would be more likely to donate money
to ‘climate change’ organizations like Oxfam. Liao said he had already
received enthusiastic support for the idea from a major pharmaceutical
company.
Although the more spiritually enlightened would argue that racism is a relic
of humanity’s brutal past, it cannot be argued that before the influence of
modern society, racism was merely defined as tribalism and was practiced
globally as an innate survival mechanism.
To characterize racism as a mental illness that has to be targeted with
pharmaceutical drugs would grease the skids for all manner of natural
behaviors to be re-defined as aberrant. Indeed, we are already seeing
attempts to define distrust of authority as a mental disease with the
increasing prominence of “oppositional defiant disorder”.
Mandating that ‘thought crimes’ like racism be medicated out of existence
represents the slippery slope towards the kind of scientific dictatorship
beyond Aldous Huxley’s worst nightmares.
*********************
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the
author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The
Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. NEW STUDY: 85% OF BIG PHARMA'S DRUGS ARE
"LEMONS"
S. L. Baker
Natural News
Aug 18, 2010
For years, natural health proponents have been sounding the alarm about the
dangers of new drugs being pushed on consumers. But is that a one-sided,
inaccurate view? Not at all. In fact, new research now shows the problems
with Big Pharma’s hugely hyped medications are far worse than most people
have even dreamed. Independent reviewers found that about 85 percent of new
drugs offer few if any new benefits — but they carry the risk of causing
serious harm to users.
According to Donald Light, Ph.D., a professor of comparative health policy
at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey who authored the
study, the pharmaceutical industry is a “market for lemons” and Big Pharma
spends a fortune to sell those lemons to the public.
“Sometimes drug companies hide or downplay information about serious side
effects of new drugs and overstate the drugs’ benefits,” Dr. Light, who
presented his findings on August 17 in Atlanta at the 105th Annual Meeting
of the American Sociological Association, said in a press statement. “Then,
they spend two to three times more on marketing than on research to persuade
doctors to prescribe these new drugs. Doctors may get misleading information
and then misinform patients about the risks of a new drug. It’s really a
two-tier market for lemons.”
Having A Supply Of Healthy Foods That Last Just Makes Sense
Dr. Light’s paper, Pharmaceuticals: A Two-Tier Market for Producing ‘Lemons’
and Serious Harm, is an institutional analysis of the pharmaceutical
industry and how it works. He based his conclusions on a wide range of data
from independent sources and studies, including the Canadian Patented
Medicine Prices Review Board, the Food and Drug Administration, and
Prescrire International (a French language journal which publishes extensive
research on pharmacology, toxicology and pharmaceutics ). Much of research
for the study was conducted for a forthcoming book Dr. Light edited, The
Risk of Prescription Drugs, which is slated for publication this fall by
Columbia University Press.
In both his paper and his book, Dr. Light emphasizes what he dubs the “Risk
Proliferation Syndrome”, which refers to the way Big Pharma has grossly
maximized the number of people exposed to new drugs with relatively low
effectiveness but a heightened risk of adverse and often severe side
effects. The pharmaceutical giants have accomplished this by failing to put
each new medication on the market using a controlled, limited launch which
would allow evidence to be gathered about the drug’s effects, positive and
negative. Instead, Big Pharma builds hugely hyped drug launches based on
clinical trials that were designed in the first place to minimize evidence
of harm and are published in the medical literature to only emphasize a drug’s
advantages.
Pharmaceutical companies spend millions of dollars on massive campaigns to
sell a new prescription med, recruiting leading doctors to use the drug for
conditions other than those for which it is approved, Dr. Light revealed. By
promoting such off-label or unapproved uses, Big Pharma goes after even more
sales and physicians inadvertently become what Dr. Light calls “double
agents” — they work to push sales of the new drug while they are supposed to
be stewards of their patients’ well-being.
And what happens when patients complain that the drug is making them sicker
and/or producing side effects? Studies show their doctors usually just
discount or dismiss these complaints, Dr. Light said.
According to the new study, the big drug companies are successful in getting
away with selling their “lemon” drugs because of three main reasons: Big
Pharma is in charge of testing their own new drugs; the pharmaceutical
companies have invested millions in building “firewalls” of legal protection
to hide information about a drug’s dangers or lack of effectiveness; and the
bar for drug efficacy is set fairly low to make it easier for Big Pharma to
get a new drug approved.
Dr. Light pointed out that despite the extensive requirements for testing
the efficacy and safety of each new medication, drug companies use a
strategy of “swamping the regulator” with large numbers of incomplete,
partial, and substandard clinical trials. For instance, in one study of 111
final applications for approval, 42% lacked adequately randomized trials,
40% had flawed testing of dosages, 39% lacked evidence of clinical efficacy,
and 49% raised concerns about serious adverse side effects.
“The result is that drugs get approved without anyone being able to know how
effective they really are or how much serious harm they will cause,” he
said. “The companies control the making of scientific knowledge and then
control which findings will go to the FDA or be published.”
As Mike Adams recently reported in NaturalNews, statin drugs are a prime
example of the Big Pharma push to market drugs as safe and effective while
glossing over the fact they often harm far more people than they help — in
the case of statins, causing everything from liver damage, acute kidney
failure, and extreme muscle weakness to cataracts
In the year 4545 You ain't gonna need your teeth, won't need your eyes
In the year 5555 Your arms hangin' limp at your sides
In the year 6565 You won't need no husband, won't need no wife
In the year 7510 If God's a-coming, He oughta make it by then
In the year 8510 God is gonna shake His mighty head
In the year 9595 I'm kinda wonderin' if man is gonna be alive
Now it's been ten thousand years, man has cried a billion tears
BACK