FDA, Drugs and Life Expectancy

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by vze4p6c2, Jul 9, 2007.

  1. vze4p6c2 Registered Member

    I read recently that Benjamin Frnaklin died when he was 87. That was about two hundred years ago, since the creation of US Constitution.

    Two hundred years later, people die at 60!! Absurd!

    Skin Cancer in African Americans. How many African Americans have skin cancer in US. How many people EVEN KNOW of skin cancer in Africa?? Thats is where the factors of FDA comes from. FDA was responsible for 900,000 deaths last year. not true? Read on:

    The California Western Law Review: An article was published there called, "Why Does the FDA Deny Access to Alternative Cancer Treatments?"

    Canadian scientists, created something called "714-X" which cured more than 1,000 patients in US. FDA Attached him.

    Book by Jason Winter, Killing Cancer, where he described how to cure certain types of cancers. He sold 1000000 books. He later was sued for "practicing medicine without a license" and "selling drugs without a license", when he recommended certain natural remedies.

    Kathy Stevens, RN, cured herself from osteoarthritis by the use of magnets. She is not allowed to recommend her ways to her patients, since she would "practicing without a license" and could be jailed.

    You can't open a business which would offer natural remedies as a cure. You would be accused of breaking a law, sued, and jailed. When you are sued by gov't you don't have a chance.

    New York Times article shows that half of drugs approved by FDA have fatal effects.

    There are countless stories like that. FDA is a monopoly that controls us!! Tell me how much it costs to produce a tablet?? Few dollars. They charge us hundreds. Its a corporation and it has a legal rights to make money and that is it, without caring about the people.

    Think about it. There is a Holocaust today, right now.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    This is a misleading comparison. You pick on man, Franklin, and try to extrapolate to everybody.

    Try looking at average life expectancy, rather than picking one outlier.

    Were his cures sceintifically verified?

    I've never heard of anybody being cured by magnets. I don't think there's any scientific support for magnetic cures. It's a pseudoscience. Is it not?

    There are plenty of "alternative" medicines that are freely sold. What you can't do, as I understand it, is to claim that they cure things when there is no evidence that they do so. That would be false advertising.

    Which article? Link please.

    The costs of developing new drugs often run into the millions of dollars.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Hercules Rockefeller Beatings will continue until morale improves. Moderator


    The costs of developing new drugs often routinely runs into the tens of millions of dollars.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. vze4p6c2 Registered Member

    Life expectancy: 77.9 years, according to CDC, sorry I can't post links yet. You see the comparison I am trying to make. That back then they lived longer, now we live shorter. You may google/look-up on your own.

    It's not even about if he's right or wrong. In my opinion, is, 'why is his mouth being shut by FDA'? Why is his freedom of press is being violated? Theoretically, you can write anything... theoretically.

    Again, same question... where is freedom of speech? Where is the First Amendment? Another thing, again in my opinion, is that 'don't you think is awry that you never heard of it'? Maybe because it is forbidden to be head of? Don't you think it may be an answer? How come on TV you never see anything else but drugs and surgeries? Because TV companies won't let you, since they are being paid millions not to. To the last part of your statement of pseudoscience. What is science? Its a bunch of facts. If they haven't discovered a vitamin, it doesn't mean the body doesn't need it. If they haven't discovered how magnetic field affects the body, it doesn't mean that body doesn't need it.

    Why won't you tell me what happened to Bio-Tape? I was effective on 90% of people. Now its virtually banned from US market. Please don't tell me you never heard of it. if really not, google it.

    I really would. Its just it says that I need to post at least 20 posts.

    Why won't you tell me please. We use (I mean pharmaceutical industry uses) millions of dollars to cure cancer. Yet, more and more people are diagnosed with cancer every year!! Doesn't it sound askance?

    DRUGS CURE SYMPTOMS NOT DISEASE! Let me ask you something. If you eat 100 tablets of any prescription, you'll die, no question about it. If you eat 200 organic apples, or 200 liter of water, or 200 of anything else that is organic, we won't die. drugs kill They are poisons.

    Licensed Health-care practitioners have higher success rate that use natural remedies, than the medical doctors.

    Reuters states that herbral extracts show that it can cure diabetes.

    The Associated Press states that walking prevents Alzheimer's disease. Yet how much do we hear that walking is good?

    Reuters report that acupuncture reduced the ills after surgeries, way better than drugs work.

    Reuters state that natural remedy provided by St. John Fort is way more effective in reducing depression than any drugs.

  8. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    This is better suited for Science and Society
  9. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member


    I agree with you. The FDA is a dangerous institution (not corporation!). But I think you are going on about this on the wrong way. Here are a few friendly comments and a little bit more info to help you....

    You can't make such argument because that is a fallacy. One person cannot be compared to the entire population. 77.9 years average is the correct way of stating it. Still, the difference between the average today and yesterday can't be easily connected to the FDA in specific- that is a speculation.

    There are many factors that could be decreasing our life expectancy. Stress, is probably on of the biggest. And, of course, cancer. Cancer is caused by toxins that are all around us. Jet fuel, for instance. Not all of it is to blame the FDA, but a lot of it, yes, it is.

    I would like to see your source so that I can quote it later.

    I'm eagerly awaiting for your links.

    Are there any studies done on the drug?

    That is not allowed in order to protect the public. Let's say I invent a pill. It's made of sugar and I say it cures cancer. See the problem with allowing everyone to practice medicine and selling drugs without a license?

    Again, the same. Don't take it badly, it is just something we have to handle.

    I'm not sure if that in particular is true...

    Do you know why the FDA doesn't like natural remedies, btw? Because they cannot be patented, so they cannot make tons of money on natural drugs. Often, corporations will take a natural remedy, add a non-medicinal ingridient (like flavour, for example), patent it and sell it as prescription drug.

    Did you know that our DNA is patented as well?

    I would like to see that one too. I'm not surprised. My wife used a drug called "Effexor" once and she almost killed herself because of it.

    That's not true. It costs millions to develop new drugs. However, the ratio is sort of correct. It takes millions to develop them and they get hundreds of billions of revenues. It's absurd.

    The FDA is not a corporation. It's a self-regulating government body. Which has power of seizure without warrant or any evidence whatsoever, btw. The amount of power that they have is attrocious.

    Oh, and while the FDA is not a corporation, it can still take bribes from corporations so that they can do their dirty work. And, of course, influencial people can do magic with the FDA (read on the next post)....

    Sort of, yes. More on the next post...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  10. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Do they take into account car accidents? Plane Accidents? Are wars taken into account?
    Were they really keeping that good of records back then? I mean, how did they know about every baby that died at birth in Maine?
  11. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member


    Please visit the following thread for lots of more information:

    Here's a bit on stevia, a safe natural sweetener that was banned from the US:

    Two articles on the dangers of aspartame, an artificial sweetener approved by Donald Rumself:

    More on aspartame:

    About the FDA:

    Read about a story on the FDA trying to ban something:

    (I suggest you not to get acquainted with the guy who wrote that book, because he's just not quite scientific enough...)

    That's all... for now. Have fun!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  12. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member


    The average life expectancy of someone in 1776 was a little over 35 years...less than half of what is today. Your talking out of your ass.

    Sound like to me, you want any old snake oil salesman to be able to practice medicine...just because they say they have a cure.
  13. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    My great-grandmother died at 107.
    What does that do for your figures?

    One isolated fact does not a statistical curve make...
  14. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Life expectancy is a statistical average, but life span is a Bell-like (but not true Bell) curve. There have been a few octogenarians for as far back as we have reliable records. But there is a much higher proportion of them now. An American born in 1900 had a life expectancy of something like 45 years. In 1700 when Ben Franklin's generation was born, as was noted by Mac, it was ten years shorter.

    However, childhood mortality was a giant perturbation in the life span curve. There was a huge jump in the early 20th century when antibiotics caused a qualitative improvement in the survival of children. If we look at the life expectancy of adults who survived all the illnesses of childhood, the trend is very informative.

    In the Mesolithic Era the average adult lived into his forties. Then when agriculture was invented, something strange happened. By Roman times, people were lucky to reach thirty. The reason was a diet based on cultivated grains. A nomadic lifestyle could not have supported the millions of people who lived in the Roman Empire alone, but the variety present in the hunter-gatherer diet provided a good mix of vitamins and minerals to the people whom the land could support. But a diet of mostly grains with a little meat is not only low in a lot of vitamins and minerals, it doesn't even have a good protein mix. Grains have to be supplemented generously with nuts and/or seeds to provide the amino acid mix required by humans.

    Life expectancy in Europe crawled very slowly out of that minimum. The Roman invention of sewers helped stem the transmission of diseases. But that technology did not spread rapidly during the Dark Ages and most European cities were unbelievably filthy by today's standards and the water was generally not drinkable.

    It wasn't until the development of modern medical science in the late 19th century that life expectancy in the Western World began to trend upward at a significant rate. By the 1960s, the life expectancy of an American adult was around 75. Today it is closer to 85.

    A good many of you kids here, if you can survive the ravages of childhood peculiar to our era (suicide is the #3 cause of death for young people in America and road accidents are in the top five all over the world, even in Africa), will live to 100.
  15. Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Is that why we are seeing so much Alzheimer's? Before they would have died before they hit that age?
  16. vze4p6c2 Registered Member

    There is way too much typing for me to argue.

    My whole point is not to prove using articles, as almost all of you inquire, but to inform you of hidden truth. I'm not here to post links to articles, with the aim to prove something, if you define 'proving' simply by looking at the article.

    I'm here to wake your conscience up, inviting you, to investigate if the FDA is killing you right now.

    I personally, have never gotten sick for two straight years, not once. I run every morning at 5:30 before I go to school, even at temperatures as low as 5 degrees Celsius even when its windy.

    You don't have to take my controversy seriously, but its good idea to keep your mind open, and merely think if its true.

    Remember: no one needed drugs in 4000 BC, how are we different now?
    Another thing to remember: Your body heals itself, you may only help it heal. Think of making a cut on your finger. No matter how many drugs you take, it won't heal faster. You may help it by stopping blood, for example.

    Many of you berate my phraseology, since I call FDA a corporation. If you ever read a book called Who Rules America by G. William Domhoff, you may have realized that corporations rule America, not the people (to a certain degree). The FDA itself is powered by the pharmaceutical industries. It is a monopoly. Think of 1920s, of Andrew, Rockefeller, they controlled all the prices. Don't you see that the drug companies are trusts? Look at the cost of a pill. Go to Europe you'll see that the drugs are effective and cheap.

    I also see you quoting my statement about Franklin. If you great great grandpa died at 107, he was adroit: He probably worked out his whole life. One of you stated that life expectancy in 16th century about 30; Its not because of lack of drugs; That is because of the conditions - no sanitation (disease spreading), dangerous working conditions, lack of immediate help (eg. too long to inform the hospital due to lack of communication systems), war, etc.

    I also see some of you berating people who desire to help using their own methods. Go to Europe, any country, you'll notice that there you can start your own drug company and develop any drug you like, and yet, there are less people who are diagnosed with cancer. Don't you think it is better to have sugar pills and cancer-free society?

    Thanks for being open minded.
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2007
  17. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    If you keep calling a government public institution a private corporation and refusing to have a logical discussion with evidence, I think you won't go very far with your ideas here. You might as well say you have a purple dragon with yellow dots in your garage and expect everyone to believe it.

    Did you follow any of my links?
  18. vze4p6c2 Registered Member

    The argument about me calling FDA being a corporation seems most pertinent to you. I thought that we are talking about drugs here, not if public institution is a corporation.

    Yes, I have looked as some of your links; I looked at one bread story that I heard of once. And as I have posted before, you don't have to believe my ideas. I say it to open your mind. Everyone knew that the world is flat, until someone decided to spark a contrary idea. Vikings didn't want to prove anything, they had a desire to find gold. I'm here to commune a contrary idea.
  19. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    You'd better get used to it if you want to participate in a scientific forum. Science is complicated, full of details. Scientific discussions are not short-winded.
    If you expect to be taken seriously here then it is you who must adapt. "Hidden truth" is the rhetoric of religion, not of science. One of the fundamental principles of science is that extraordinary assertions require extraordinary substantiation. The "point" of introducing you to these articles is to help you understand why your assertions are extraordinary and why, therefore, they require far more substantiation than you are providing.
    I'm no fan of the FDA, but you're not making any points for our side with your less-than-scientific approach to the subject when speaking on a scientific forum.
    I'm not sure I wouldn't just rather get sick once in a while than have to live like that.
    People had all kinds of drugs that were derived from herbs and other natural sources. The only difference today is that we are able to produce a wider and richer variety in laboratories.
    The biggest problem with wounds in the old days was infection. People died from infected cuts and other injuries all the time. Antibiotics--one of many kinds of modern drugs--put a stop to that.
    It most certainly was! The greatest factor in the average life expectancy in those days was infant mortality. People were lucky if half of their children lived to be ten. Antibiotics and vaccines--two kinds of modern drugs--have effectively eradicated almost all of the diseases that ravaged babies and children, at least in the developed world where governments allow children access to these medicines. Smallpox, pneumonia, diphtheria, typhus, malaria, poliomyelitis, bubonic and pneumonic plague... the list would fill this page.
    I am well aware of the controversy over the unavailability of experimental medicine for terminal cancer patients. Believe it or not, there is a reasonable argument on both sides. It's quite complicated; this is by no means a straightforward policy decision. I have not been able to make up my mind about it. You have done nothing to help me with it, and apparently others feel the same way. I appreciate your intentions but not your methods. This is a place of science so please try to be more scientific.
  20. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    That's why we're seeing so much of everything. People didn't have as much chance to die from things like cancer and atherosclerosis, which are leading causes of death today.
  21. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    A lot of people agree with you. But those who don't would not be convinced if you don't present any evidence. We are trying to help you develop skills that would help you spread the word in a more effective manner. Please don't take it as an offense against you.
  22. TruthSeeker Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey Valued Senior Member

    It's unfortunate they are so overused, though. The latest strongest antibiotics has already become useless in a few occasions (sorry, I forgot its name). For how long can we keep up with this?
  23. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    The part quoted above, along with just about everything you've posted here is not only incorrect but pretty much absurd! We get some real "winners" of posts at times but seldom do they show any more lack of education than has been demonstrated in each of your posts beginning with the initial one.

    People from long ago often DIED from what today is considered a simple cut. Infection quickly set in and rapidly spread through the whole body. I'd be willing to bet that you don't even know what gangrene is! Deadly, deadly stuff! And so is tetanus - which, of course, they couldn't treat either. Childhood diseases like chicken pox, mumps, measles smallpox, E.coli, polio and dozens of other things that either hardly exist today or easily treated killed MILLIONS not long ago. Most infants NEVER even reached the age of ten.

    Also, you seem to have no idea whatsoever about what it costs to develop a drug and take it all the way to market. And even with the high prices we're charged for a new drug it still takes years for the company to earn what it cost them in the beginning.

    You would do quite well to actually LEARN something about all these subjects (including alternative medicine and treatments) before spouting so much absolutely BAD information.

Share This Page