By Jon Rappoport
“After any agreement is achieved between high-level criminals, there are two basic phases. First, conflicts arise, and the settlements are crude and sometimes painful. Second, the criminal parties realize, like the ‘gentlemen’ they are, that the jackpot they are sharing is big enough for everyone. So they unify their stance. They focus in on their real target: the public.” —The Underground, Jon Rappoport
Question: “Who said that drug was safe? Where did that assessment come from? People are dropping like flies.”
Answer: “We all said it was safe. Remember? All twelve members of the TPP. We all agreed. So now we have to stick to our guns. Admit nothing. Keep your mouth shut.”
This “trade treaty,” the TPP, will, if passed, eventually morph into a close-knit international collective of government agencies that collaborate on medical-drug “safety.”
Translation: the US FDA and Health Canada, and the Australian TGA, and the New Zealand MEDSAFE, and the medical regulatory agencies of Singapore, Vietnam, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, and Peru will: declare dangerous drugs to be safe. Together. On behalf of the corporations who manufacture them.
When a massive global agency, like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), is actually a criminal organization, it enjoys special benefits, not the least of which is freedom from prosecution.
Now you’re talking about real power. Now you’re talking about the Wild West, in terms of the license to commit crimes.
Except, with such agencies, it all looks very organized, very legitimate, very sober, very corporate. The crazy outlaws wear suits and cut their hair. They carry briefcases and write reports. They don’t chew tobacco and spit the juice on the street. They don’t stagger out of saloons and fire their guns in the air.
They have workable relationships with the press. They’re faceless. They gnaw away at populations from the inside.
Among other corporate benefits, the TPP will allow pharmaceutical companies to extend the life of patents on drugs. And those drugs will be exported and imported, from country to country, with far less oversight re their destructive health effects, because, in phase one, drug companies will be able to sue governments, in private tribunals, for “restraint of free trade,” when the specter of drug-dangers is raised and drug-imports are refused and turned away.
“We, the government of Canada, don’t want to accept drug X from company Y in Japan. They may think drug X is safe, but we don’t.”
“Too bad. If you don’t accept it, we, company Y in Japan, will sue you in a private tribunal, and we’ll win, and you’ll have to pay enormous damages…”
Yes, that’s how things will work under the TPP, in phase one. But soon enough, in phase two, the government regulatory agencies in the 12 TPP countries will become unified. They will simply rubber-stamp new medical drugs together. And say the drugs are safe. It’s easier that way. Less conflict. Fewer disputes.
Killer effects of the drugs? Of course; but “not a problem.”
In case you haven’t noticed, modern medicines are a leading cause of death, wherever they are used widely.
Case in point. One out of hundreds. Vioxx, a drug to treat pain and arthritis.
Manufacturer: Merck. Approved by the US FDA as safe and effective in 1999. Before it was withdrawn from the market in 2004, Merck pocketed in the vicinity of $12.5 billion in global sales.
Finally, after 10,000 individual suits were filed against Merck, and 190 class-actions, and a 2010 US federal case, Merck paid out roughly $8 billion in judgments.
Once Vioxx was taken off the market, it was revealed it had caused between 88,000 and 140,000 cases of heart disease—and between 30 and 40 percent of these cases were probably fatal. These are very conservative estimates.
How had that mass destruction happened? In America it was through the efforts of the US FDA, the agency responsible for certifying medicines as safe and effective before they are released for public use.
I mention the FDA because, once it decides a drug is safe and effective, the US company that manufactures it can, under the TPP, demand that every other TPP country accept that judgment as well.
For instance, if the US FDA claimed Vioxx was safe, then Merck, the US company that manufactured it, could sell it to the 12-member countries of the TPP, and if there were any government refusals on the grounds of safety, Merck could sue the refusing government in a secret corporate court and win. Even though Vioxx is deadly. That’s phase one activity.
And again, in phase two, this corrosive “conflict resolution” would eventually give way to a much more basic collusion—all health agencies of all TPP member countries would get together and say, “Let’s not have these disputes. Too messy. Too abrasive. Let’s all automatically agree on the safety of new drugs. Even when they’re not safe.”
For a preview of how that international system will work, let’s see how one current agency, the FDA, operates in the area of drug safety. Let’s see how it acts on behalf of its actual clients, the pharmaceutical giants.
Enter David Graham. He was an FDA researcher. He had studied the effects of Vioxx.
USA Today reported (10/12/2004, “How did Vioxx debacle happen?”):
“Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, says the FDA was worse than passive. Investigators for the Senate Finance Committee, which Grassley chairs, met Thursday with FDA researcher David Graham, lead scientist on a study presented in August at a medical meeting in France.
“The study, an analysis of a database of 1.4 million Kaiser Permanente members, found that those who took Vioxx were more likely to suffer a heart attack or sudden cardiac death than those who took Celebrex, Vioxx’s main rival. Based on their findings, Graham and his collaborators linked Vioxx to more than 27,000 heart attacks or sudden cardiac deaths nationwide from the time it came on the market in 1999 through 2003.
“Graham told the finance committee investigators that the FDA was trying to block publication of his findings, Grassley said in a statement. “Dr. Graham described an environment where he was ‘ostracized,’ ‘subjected to veiled threats’ and ‘intimidation,’ ” Grassley said. Graham gave Grassley copies of e-mail that appear to support his claims that his [FDA] superiors suggested watering down his conclusions.”
Well, Graham had a lot more to say, and he said it to Manette Loudon, lead investigator for Gary Null, in an exclusive interview:
MANETTE: Has anyone tried to silence you and stop you from becoming a whistleblower?
- GRAHAM: Prior to my Senate testimony [re Vioxx] in mid-November of 2004, there was an orchestrated campaign by senior level FDA managers to intimidate me so that I would not testify before Congress. This intimidation took several forms. One attack came from our acting Center Director who contacted the editor of the Lancet, the prestigious medical journal in the United Kingdom, and intimated to the editor that I had committed scientific misconduct and that they shouldn’t publish a paper that I had written showing that Vioxx increases the risks of heart attack. This high-level FDA official never talked to me about this allegation. He just went directly to the Lancet.
The second attack was from other high level FDA officials who contacted Senator Grassley’s office and attempted to prevent Senator Grassley and his staff from supporting me and calling me as a witness. They knew that if they could disarm Senator Grassley that would neutralize me.
The third attack came from senior FDA officials who contacted Tom Devine, my attorney at the Government Accountability Project, and attempted to convince him that he should not represent me because I was guilty of scientific misconduct; I was a bully; a demigod; and a terrible person that couldn’t be trusted. These people were posing as whistleblowers themselves ratting on another whistleblower. Some of these senior level FDA officials were in my supervisory chain and are people I work for. They were involved in a coordinated attempt to discredit me and to smear my name and to prevent me from giving testimony.
There’s one other thing that happened the week before I testified [before Senator Grassley’s Committee]. The Acting Commissioner of the FDA invited me to his office and offered me a job in the Commissioner’s Office to oversee the revitalization of drug safety for the FDA if I would just leave the Office of Drug Safety and come to the Commissioner’s Office. Obviously he had been tipped off by people in the Senate Finance Committee who are sympathetic to the FDA’s status quo that I was going to be called as a witness. To preempt that, he offers me this job, which basically would have been exile to a fancy title with no real ability to have an impact. This was a conspiracy and it was coordinated and there was collaboration among senior level FDA officials. What a mess!
—End interview excerpt—
Let’s switch gears, and hear from another FDA drug reviewer, Ronald Cavanagh. He gave a stunning interview to Martha Rosenberg at truth-out.org (July 20, 2012, “Former FDA Reviewer Speaks Out About Intimidation, Retaliation, and Marginalization of Safety”). Here are a few choice excerpts from his comments:
“…widespread [FDA] racketeering, including witness tampering and witness retaliation.”
“I was threatened with prison.”
“One [FDA] manager threatened my children… I was afraid that I could be killed for talking to Congress and criminal investigators.”
Cavanagh reviewed new drug applications made to the FDA by pharmaceutical companies. He was one of the holdouts at the Agency who insisted that the drugs had to be safe and effective before being released to the public.
But honest appraisal wasn’t part of the FDA culture, and Cavanagh swam against the tide, until he realized his life and the life of his children were on the line.
What was his covert task at the FDA supposed to be? “Drug reviewers were clearly told not to question drug companies and that our job was to approve drugs,” Cavanagh said. In other words, rubber stamp them. Say the drugs were safe and effective when they were not.
Cavanagh’s revelations are astonishing. He recalls a meeting where a drug-company representative flat-out stated that his company had paid the FDA for a new-drug approval. Paid for it. As in bribe.
*****He remarks that the drug pyridostigmine, given to US troops to prevent the effects of nerve gas, “actually increased the lethality” of certain nerve agents.
Cavanagh recalls being given records of safety data on a drug—and then his bosses told him which sections not to read. Obviously, they knew the drug was dangerous and they knew exactly where, in the reports, that fact would be revealed.
We are not dealing with isolated incidents of cheating and lying. We are not dealing with a few isolated bought-off FDA employees. The situation at the FDA isn’t correctable with a few firings. This is an ongoing criminal enterprise.
As I’ve reported many times in these pages, a landmark review, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association on July 26, 2000, clearly states that FDA-approved drugs kill 106,000 Americans per year. (Author, Dr. Barbara Starfield, “Is US health really the best in the world”)
This adds up to one million deaths per decade.
In a 2009 interview, Dr. Starfield told me her figures were on the conservative side. She also told me, emphatically, that since publishing her review in 2000, no federal agency had approached her for help in remedying this decimation of human life, and she was aware of no government program aimed at an overall solution.
How can the FDA routinely approve medical drugs as safe and effective, when they kill, at a minimum, 100,000 Americans a year?
The excerpts from the interviews above explain how, quite clearly.
Also realize that this death toll indicates, without question, widespread and endemic fraud in medical journals, which, like clockwork, publish studies that praise and exonerate the drugs.
Which is why, Dr. Marcia Angell, who, for 20 years, was an editor of one of the most prestigious journals in the world, The New England Journal of Medicine, published this statement:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Marcia Angell, MD, “Drug Companies and Doctors: A story of Corruption.” NY Review of Books, Jan. 15, 2009.)
So…with the TPP Treaty passed and ratified, you can expect, in phase two, a much larger bureaucracy, among the 12 member nations, to push for and insist on release of medical drugs that kill and maim. The FDA and its culture will multiply into a de facto 12-nation TPP agency. All for the sake of “free trade.”
The TPP is global government of, by, and for mega-corporations. And one elite class of corporation is pharmaceutical.
This is why people everywhere must expose the dangers of medical drugs and insist on the freedom to refuse medication.
The naïve faith in the overall safety of drugs is by way of mind control. People think all is well because the opposite conclusion is too horrifying to contemplate. It would topple too many idols. It would bring down foundational pillars of Reality.
Yes, and that process of thought/faith is how mass mind control works.