Pregnancy drug raised daughters' cancer odds

[ocsdor]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...AhTaAA?docId=aa4f93fb89ec4b768a58d03d4cc42268

Though it is not a vaccine, it is yet another example of the "medical profession" giving out medicine that is "good for you".

 

[rambone]

The whole herd should be forced to take this. Then we can thank the medical gods for eliminating miscarriage.

 

[rambone]

In the United States alone, more than 2 million women and 2 million men are thought to have been exposed to DES while in the womb and may now want to talk with their doctors about when they should be screened for health problems.

Man, that is lot of future pharmaceutical customers.

 

[g00n24]

Yea, these evil drug companies should just stop developing medications because all they do is cause harm. Every drug/vaccine ever made was never made to help anyone ever, only to make obscene profits.
I mean come on...these guys couldn't look into the future 40 or 50 years down the road and see what their poison was going to do to people. They better not be developing any future meds now because I am sure they are using the same technology and same research to make new meds with as they did 40 years ago.
Forgive me for not putting that in purple.
Sure mistakes have been made, but you learn from mistakes. Medicine is not a perfect science but it is there to make people better and their lives easier to live. Yeah there will be problems and there will continue to be problems for certain people. To just complain about every thing an industry does and call them evil for seeking a profit for their research and labor is wrong. I am not saying that is what is going on here, but I know people do that.
Yes there is a problem with medical professionals prescribing drugs before trying other forms of treatment, however that works for a lot of people, and while it is not the best form of medicine it is often an acceptable form. Simply attacking drug companies for doing their job and developing medications that treat a problem will not solve anything.

 

[indykid]

g00n24 is so right. Why do doctors and medications cost so much? Because they have to keep lawyers on their payrolls and pay unimaginable malpractice insurance just because they are human.

If a drug saves one million people, but has a bad effect on one person, that person or his/her family will sue the drug manufacturer for enough money to not make that drug worth making. Why, because the drug manufacturer is run by humans, with drugs discovered and tested by scientists who are human and the drug is proscribed by doctors who are human. And unfortunately even in a perfect society mistakes will be made.

Why, because only God can make a perfect drug. Only God can make a perfect diagnosis. And as long as people are human, honest mistakes will be made, even when the initial intent of the drug, diagnosis, or treatment is done with truly the best of intent.

And don't think I am out of touch with the situation. I have every reason to hate drug companies. My wife was killed by a drug that was supposed to save her. Unfortunately that drug has saved millions of people, and looking at the whole picture, that drug is still needed for what it was designed for.

 

[rambone]

I mean come on...these guys couldn't look into the future 40 or 50 years down the road and see what their poison was going to do to people.

Goon,

People need to realize that the claims of adequate safety do not account for subtle long-term problems. Maybe it is impossible to make those kinds of predictions. But patients need to be smart and realize that every unnatural foreign chemical that they put in their bodies could have consequences that are far worse than the problem they were trying to treat or prevent.

I think that negative effects from drug use are far more common than people realize. Your body wasn't made to choke down synthetic hormones and toxic compounds. Combine that with the fact that everyone and their mother is taught to use drugs from birth to death, and you have a major phenomenon going on in our sick society.

 

[rambone]

Why, because only God can make a perfect drug.

This is something that people need to remember. God gave us an amazing system of protecting our health. Our immune system can take more than people give it credit for. Take care of your body and it will take care of you. Don't purposely eat garbage food with no nutritional value and laced with chemical preservatives. Don't harm it with man-made poisons that promise wellness. Drugs should be a last, last resort.

My wife was killed by a drug that was supposed to save her. Unfortunately that drug has saved millions of people, and looking at the whole picture, that drug is still needed for what it was designed for.

I'm really sorry to hear that. Can I ask which drug?

 

[ocsdor]

... My wife was killed by a drug that was supposed to save her. Unfortunately that drug has saved millions of people, and looking at the whole picture, that drug is still needed for what it was designed for.

My problem is not about giving drugs to help (attempt to) fix/treat a condition that exists; my problem is giving drugs to "fix/treat" a condition that does NOT exists.

It is much worse, even sinister, when "fixing" the non-existent condition leads to future conditions that need fixing. And, if done without consent of a fully informed patient, in my opinion, is premeditated murder.

If it ain't broke; don't fix it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho

 

[indykid]

I'm really sorry to hear that. Can I ask which drug?

The drug was the cancer fighter adriamycin. Known in the business as "The Red Death", it is a great cancer fighter, unfortunately it is also very cardio-toxic to some people. I know of many women killed by adriamycin, but I know of many millions that are alive today because of it.

Horrible choice we mere mortals must make.

 

[g00n24]

This is something that people need to remember. God gave us an amazing system of protecting our health. Our immune system can take more than people give it credit for. Take care of your body and it will take care of you. Don't purposely eat garbage food with no nutritional value and laced with chemical preservatives. Don't harm it with man-made poisons that promise wellness. Drugs should be a last, last resort.

I would say you completely correct on most of your points here. One thing I would point out, however, is many of us who are living in today's world would not have lived long (or at all) in a world without many of the man-made/synthesized chemicals keeping them alive. Obviously much of the problems come, as you point out, when drugs are taken when they are not needed and people rely on them to do things that can be taken care of through other means.
However, it is hard to get a physician to go against a standard of care for a certain condition/ailment. If a certain drug therapy becomes the standard of care (rightly or wrongly) because it takes care of (or at least manages) the condition for 98% of the people suffering from it then a physician would be taking a big risk going against those standards.
Living comfortably is also a big reason people rely on drugs so much. Even if a drug has serious side effects, and the patient knows it, many times they will keep putting it in their bodies because they are living with some kind of pain (mental, physical, real, or perceived).
Like you point how though, it is ultimately up to the patients to realize what they may be doing to themselves, sometimes the pros outweigh the cons for many folks.

 

[g00n24]

My problem is not about giving drugs to help (attempt to) fix/treat a condition that exists; my problem is giving drugs to "fix/treat" a condition that does NOT exists.

It is much worse, even sinister, when "fixing" the non-existent condition leads to future conditions that need fixing. And, if done without consent of a fully informed patient, in my opinion, is premeditated murder.

If it ain't broke; don't fix it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-CrNlilZho

while I don't have time to watch the video now, I will have to point out that much of the time the doctors prescribing the drugs don't know all the risks involved because the research has not been done yet. Even with all the testing done before a drug can get on the market the meds are still only being tested in a relatively small sample size. Open that sample size up to the world and you will find things out that none of the developers or doctors could have tested for. I don't know if that has anything to do with the video, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

 

[indykid]

You have seen me write on the results of one drug that has saved many but also killed some.

Now let's look at another circumstance. Many if not all drugs are tested over many years on first with animals, and then if they show promise, on people. Sometimes if a drug works so well, it is tested as best as possible so that there is a good chance it will work on many people. Usually the results show the scientists, doctors and lawyers made a good choice.

No how about a drug that has never been tested. Say you have a child who is born with a condition that has been seen many times, and to date there have been no children that survived. Zero, zip, none. Say the head of the neo-natal intensive care comes up to you, as your child lay dying, and says he has a drug that is in adult trials, has never been used on a child non-the-less one days old. Do you take that chance? What if the drug doesn't work, do you sue the manufacturer because your child died even though that child would have died regardless?

So here is the other side of my life, the amazing one where my daughter developed a disease that doctors had no cure for. Your daughter lay dying in Riley Hospital, and the head of the NICU comes up and says he has a drug that he doesn't even know how to dose for someone your child's age. My wife and I said we had nothing to lose. Well guess what? That drug worked and my daughter became the first one in history to survive this still as yet unknown illness. Today, every child born who exhibits the symptoms is immediately given the drug, and now the greater majority survive that which none survived. That drug today is known as Captopril, a great heart drug. A drug that not only is saving children that would never grow up, but adults continue to live a good life.

So I personally have seen both ends of how good and bad and good drugs can be. One saves many and yet my wife died because of it. Another drug, with almost no testing saved my daughter from what otherwise was guaranteed death.

So what do you do? Life itself is a crap-shoot. You have no idea when you leave the house if you will be lucky enough to return. And just because we are human, we cannot make a drug that will be 100% safe. And with all the testing in the world, there comes a time to either scrap the drug, possibly dooming a few to certain death, or use that drug which might save millions, but has the potential of killing a couple. And when one of those couple is your loved one, do you ban the drug, dooming others?


Oh, and my daughter today is a research neuroscientist working on a cure for Alzheimer's Disease. And if she finds a drug that seems to work, do you want to be the potential first to take it to find out if it works? She is alive to do this because she became the first!

 

[turnandshoot4]

The whole herd should be forced to take this. Then we can thank the medical gods for eliminating miscarriage.

The sheep are those that take it. Not those that prescribe. A prescription or doctors order are mere suggestions.

Your beef is with people. Notthose docors.

 

[ocsdor]

On a related note: Prison Planet.com » Steve Jobs dead at 56, his life ended prematurely by chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer

and another:
http://www.infowars.com/bpa-exposure-before-birth-linked-to-breast-cancer/

 

[hornadylnl]

You have seen me write on the results of one drug that has saved many but also killed some.

Now let's look at another circumstance. Many if not all drugs are tested over many years on first with animals, and then if they show promise, on people. Sometimes if a drug works so well, it is tested as best as possible so that there is a good chance it will work on many people. Usually the results show the scientists, doctors and lawyers made a good choice.

No how about a drug that has never been tested. Say you have a child who is born with a condition that has been seen many times, and to date there have been no children that survived. Zero, zip, none. Say the head of the neo-natal intensive care comes up to you, as your child lay dying, and says he has a drug that is in adult trials, has never been used on a child non-the-less one days old. Do you take that chance? What if the drug doesn't work, do you sue the manufacturer because your child died even though that child would have died regardless?

So here is the other side of my life, the amazing one where my daughter developed a disease that doctors had no cure for. Your daughter lay dying in Riley Hospital, and the head of the NICU comes up and says he has a drug that he doesn't even know how to dose for someone your child's age. My wife and I said we had nothing to lose. Well guess what? That drug worked and my daughter became the first one in history to survive this still as yet unknown illness. Today, every child born who exhibits the symptoms is immediately given the drug, and now the greater majority survive that which none survived. That drug today is known as Captopril, a great heart drug. A drug that not only is saving children that would never grow up, but adults continue to live a good life.

So I personally have seen both ends of how good and bad and good drugs can be. One saves many and yet my wife died because of it. Another drug, with almost no testing saved my daughter from what otherwise was guaranteed death.

So what do you do? Life itself is a crap-shoot. You have no idea when you leave the house if you will be lucky enough to return. And just because we are human, we cannot make a drug that will be 100% safe. And with all the testing in the world, there comes a time to either scrap the drug, possibly dooming a few to certain death, or use that drug which might save millions, but has the potential of killing a couple. And when one of those couple is your loved one, do you ban the drug, dooming others?


Oh, and my daughter today is a research neuroscientist working on a cure for Alzheimer's Disease. And if she finds a drug that seems to work, do you want to be the potential first to take it to find out if it works? She is alive to do this because she became the first!

Sorry to hear about your wife and great for your daughter. Thanks for your excellent post. The following isn't directed at any one person.


I don't have much of a dog in the fight on pharma. I don't have a whole lot of experience in pharma personally. I hate taking any sort of medication and only do so when absolutely necessary. I think there are a lot of great meds out there if used properly. I have an aunt who has destroyed her life from her addiction to pain meds. I believe she is on 20-30 different meds at any given time. My mom was on over 20 pills a day at one time. It seems that they give you one med and then have to give you more to take care of the symptoms of the first one.

It is my personal belief that man cannot create what God made. IE, there will always be problems of some sort with anything man made we put into our bodies. If you want to take meds for this or that, I believe 100% that that should be the choice of the patient and their doctor. Rambone takes constant heat for his position on pharma on here but here's where I see the key difference between him and his detractors on here. I've never seen Rambone try to use the state to force his opinions on others. I step back and look at which side wants to use force to implement their beliefs. If you want vaccines, meds, etc for you and your children, more power to you. Where I have a problem is others wanting to force their beleifs on me. There are those who want the state to force vaccines on those who don't want them. There are those who want to use the state to force parents to administer meds or treatments on their children.

It's kind of the same logic that the libs have when it comes to socialism. It's so good that we have to make it mandatory.

 

[ocsdor]

^ ^ ^ ^ ^