Computed tomography (CT) scans are overused in the United States and could account for up to 5% of all cancer cases in the near future. This is the primary conclusion of a study published this Monday in the journal *JAMA Internal Medicine*, which tallied approximately 93 million CT scans performed in 2023; the authors estimate that the radiation from these procedures could lead to 103,000 future cancer cases. The researchers note that this figure is 3 to 4 times higher than previous estimates.
Computed tomography (CT) is widely used to detect tumors and diagnose numerous diseases. Since 2007, the annual number of such examinations in the United States has risen by 30%—a continuing upward trend.
At the same time, CT scans expose patients to ionizing radiation (which causes potentially carcinogenic DNA mutations), and it has long been known that this technology carries an increased cancer risk. Specifically, the radiation received during these tests can lead to lung cancer, breast cancer, and other types of tumors. The risk is highest for infants, followed by children and adolescents.
In 2023, an international study conducted by scientists at ISGlobal in Barcelona highlighted the impact of radiation exposure, estimating that for every 10,000 children examined using this technique, one or two could develop a blood cancer within the following 12 years as a result of that exposure.
In Australia, I had SO many patients referred for CT scans the longer I worked in my chiropractic career. For simple things. For things where a basic X-ray would be far more useful. In most cases the CT scan was not even warranted, IMO. The docs were too lazy to even take basic patient histories, so they sent their patients off to get fried, and would almost always only read the report, not view the scans themselves.
The number of patients I had to show exactly where their disc bulge or other such problem was on the scan? My gosh. Too many!! The poor patients weren't even shown what was what in their scans.
Early on in my career, docs often referred patients for basic X-rays, or even ultrasounds. And that was fine. The problem could be seen most of the time and the patient had minimal radiation. But as soon as docs got wind of ways they could make more $$ (ie referring for CT scans or MRIs), they used those. But of course they'd prefer the CT scans over MRI because they got better pay for that themselves, and not only was MRI invented AFTER CT, thus MRI had reasonable patient out-of-pocket expenses associated with it, $$ that did not find its way back to the doc, all the (big) hospitals ended up having CT scanners, not MRI machines, due to the invention timeline, so they were commonplace, and so yeah, the docs just handed out referrals for CT scans like candy. It was - and still is - so wrong.
I was the one left to explain about the radiation risks to my country patients - because I actually cared about my patients! So at least people knew they were getting about 1 year of day-to-day radiation (eg from the sun, bricks in the wall, appliances etc) from a brain CT scan, 2 years for a spinal CT scan, about 5 years for an abdominal CT scan, and about 10 years for the same thing done with dye (because they do it twice!). Some new patients I saw came in with a WAD of CT scans they'd already had. I told them to never have another CT scan IN THEIR LIFE unless they were literally going to die not having it, because another scan could very well cause them cancer - if they weren't already on the path to that by then!
The utter evilness the medical profession gets away with is horrendous. The docs rarely do their jobs properly. But they have no problem raking in the cash. Patients are almost NEVER fully informed. But they're the ones who take the full brunt of the referral, treatment etc - and in this case, radiation.
Thank you for using your own experience to shed light on a grim reality. The United States has built a healthcare system with corrupt incentives for doctors and the various entities involved in healthcare—incentives that inevitably lead to terrible and perverse outcomes. These incentives do not prioritize health and well-being. Vaccines can impair the natural immune system, and drugs often distort a child’s normal physiological responses, such as a moderate fever. Factors like nutrition, exercise, education, emotional security, our natural environment, and public safety are overlooked. Research studies funded by the pharmaceutical industry fail to analyze the risks posed by the cumulative and synergistic effects—not only of vaccines themselves but also of pharmaceutical treatments designed to suppress symptoms rather than address the underlying illness. Furthermore, environmental pollution leaves a significant mark on our health, contributing to a wide range of chronic diseases in adulthood—diseases that, in turn, swell the multi-billion-dollar revenues of the pharmaceutical industry and the puppets who dance to its tune.
In USA I suspect a lot of these MDs following the "script" to keep clients on "forever meds" is b/c they have very expensive mortgages, and/or vacation homes/excursions. Could the same apply to Australia?
Before resorting to statins—which carry serious health risks—one should consider diet and healthy lifestyle habits. Additionally, there are supplements such as psyllium, berberine, pantethine, phytosterols, bergamot, olive extract, and artichoke extract, among others. These work through various mechanisms that complement one another and can yield excellent results, all without the drawbacks associated with statins.
New guidelines from the American Heart Association could reduce the number of adults eligible for statin therapy. Under these new guidelines, approximately 40% fewer people will meet the criteria to receive statins.
The 2023 PREVENT equations provide a more comprehensive assessment of cardiovascular risk than previous guidelines; they remove race as a factor and incorporate additional health indicators, such as kidney disease and obesity.
A cross-sectional study published in *JAMA Internal Medicine* suggests that if the PREVENT equations are adopted into national guidelines, approximately 40% fewer people would qualify for statin treatment.
The study, which analyzed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2017–March 2020), included a weighted sample of 3,785 U.S. adults aged 40 to 75 with no known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).
Some physicians have pressured patients to take various medications, even threatening to discontinue their care if they refused to follow the prescribed treatment. There are two distinct perspectives regarding statin medications.
Proponents of statins focus on how these cholesterol-lowering drugs save lives. Critics of statins focus on how these medications can harm one's health. What is the correct perspective? Find out at the link below.
Statins reduce Coenzyme Q10, increasing the risk of dementia and cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, fatigue, joint and muscle pain, diabetes, depression, cancer, cataracts, and glaucoma have been associated with statin use.
And yes, I'd caution my patients on the use of statins as well!! So few got off them. Some did, though. I recall one patient had such terrible muscle pains he had to quit taking them. His daughter, who actually worked for a cardiovascular specialist, was adamant he keep taking them. Put it this way: my patient was very happy off the statins!! He got his life back!
CANADIAN STUDY. A Canadian study of 89,835 women regarding mammography.
The Canadian National Breast Screening Study followed 89,835 women aged 40–59 for 25 years.
It found:
• cumulative breast cancer mortality: practically the same;
• mortality hazard ratio (HR): 0.99 (95% CI 0.88–1.12);
• 106 additional persistent cancers in the mammography group;
• the authors estimated that 22% of the invasive cancers detected through screening were overdiagnosed.
Conclusion: Annual mammography in women aged 40–59 does not reduce breast cancer mortality beyond what is achieved through physical examination or usual care, in a setting where adjuvant therapy for breast cancer is readily available. Overall, 22% (106/484) of screen-detected invasive breast cancers were overdiagnosed, which amounts to one overdiagnosed breast cancer for every 424 women who underwent mammography screening in the trial.
Maybe the medical profession actually liked the the 'null' result because it wasn't like MORE people were dying due to the physicals, so they couldn't be seen as HARMING anyone per se...and the bonus was that the docs got more diagnoses out of it ie more money!!
If you're in the business of making money, it's an ideal result! Because if you have to actually HELP your patients (heaven forbid that those annual checks might actually HELP the patient!) then patients have a clear benchmark. If you're then seen as not helping them later on, well, you're now failing. Causing issues! It gets a bit...messy. And blame is assigned.
But if you were never helping, or hindering, to begin with, just keeping it all on par, then you can't get blamed, can you?! And you STILL get to make more money!
The only ones not cottoning onto this concept are the ignorant patients.
Yes, Robyn, what is truly concerning is not that someone might question the pharmaceutical industry; rather, it would be concerning if we stopped doing so, given that the facts point to persistent corruption driven by economic interests.
The pharmaceutical industry handles vast sums of money and maintains inevitable relationships with governments, regulatory bodies, researchers, and scientific societies. For this very reason, conflicts of interest cannot be dismissed as mere administrative details—when they have the potential to influence decision-making, they become a public health issue.
This is not a conspiracy theory. The World Health Organization (WHO) itself acknowledges that conflicts of interest can introduce commercial bias into decision-making, thereby compromising public health and eroding trust in institutions. The WHO has also called for greater transparency regarding clinical trial data, pricing, patents, and research and development costs.
Therefore, we must demand something quite straightforward: complete and accessible data, the disclosure of all conflicts of interest, truly independent researchers, regulators free from commercial pressure, and public audits of decision-making processes.
When the manufacturer of a product is directly or indirectly involved in generating the evidence for it—when those who fund the research stand to benefit from the results, and when regulators fail to provide the information necessary for third parties to review their decisions—trust cannot simply be demanded; it must be earned.
If any company, researcher, official, or regulator has manipulated data, concealed information, or prioritized economic gain over the safety of citizens, they must be investigated and held accountable—regardless of who they are. This is a matter of critical importance, as such actions can lead to serious harm and even death.
We must ensure that no industry holds more power than scientific evidence, and that no regulatory body remains beyond the reach of public scrutiny.
*****SCIENCE REQUIRES NEITHER CENSORSHIP NOR PROPAGANDA; IT REQUIRES TRANSPARENCY, INDEPENDENCE, AND ACCOUNTABILITY.*****
Having just turned 77, I have never received a flu vaccine. The key is to take care of one’s immune system through healthy food, exercise, avoiding stress by spending time in nature, and maintaining good levels of vitamin D.
I admire the excellent and responsible physicians Dr. Peter McCullough and Nicolas Hulscher for calling on U.S. Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to halt the distribution of these diabolical mRNA-based flu vaccines.
Regarding previous flu vaccines, McCullough concluded: "These data suggest that the enormous effort dedicated to vaccinating the general population is a waste of time and resources. If frail and elderly individuals do not experience a direct reduction in hospitalizations and deaths, then flu vaccination should be handled on an individual basis, depending on specific pulmonary and systemic risks." Now, those risks are compounded by this diabolical mRNA technology.
Vaccines must cease to be treated as a religion—a dogma of faith in their efficacy. When Dr. Humphries raised concerns that flu vaccines might cause renal failure, her colleagues dismissed her by invoking the "mythology" surrounding medicine’s most celebrated vaccines (for instance, "the head of internal medicine reminded me that 'smallpox was eradicated through vaccines, and polio was eradicated in the United States through vaccines'"). This prompted Humphries to examine that mythology and write the seminal book *Dissolving Illusions*, which precisely demonstrated why that narrative was a lie.
mRNA vaccines, in particular, have proven to be gravely dangerous. Just three months ago, in August 2025, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that the federal government would wind down mRNA vaccine development, canceling 22 contracts worth nearly half a billion dollars. An internal review had found that mRNA vaccines—particularly those aimed at respiratory viruses—had repeatedly “failed to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu.”
Confirmatory results regarding the failure of the seasonal influenza vaccine, as well as the fact that it causes an increased risk of acute respiratory infections (ARI) associated with confirmed non-influenza respiratory virus infections (RR, 4.40; 95% CI
MAHA must incorporate at least one course on natural medicine into medical studies. The priority should be to maintain an immune system capable of defending against viruses and bacteria through proper nutrition and healthy lifestyle habits. Beyond staying in bed and sweating it out, there are other natural ingredients that can be used as remedies for the flu:--------------------------
Beyond staying in bed and sweating it out, there are other natural ingredients that can be used as remedies for the flu:
-----1) Honey with ginger: Helps expel mucus and acts against a dry cough. You can also mix it with lemon juice, heat it up, and gargle with the resulting liquid. Not recommended for children under two years of age.
----2) Onion: Much like garlic, simply include it—preferably raw—in the dishes you prepare.---- 3) Eucalyptus: Helps clear nasal passages. Boil it in water and use the steam for inhalation; cover yourself with a towel to trap the steam.
----4) Thyme: Another great ally for treating upper respiratory tract conditions. Use it in stews, add it to your tea, or inhale the steam by boiling it in water.---- 5) Cinnamon: Mix half a tablespoon of powdered cinnamon with a tablespoon of honey to soothe a cough. Add this paste to your tea or consume it three times a day.
Thank you for highlighting the serious limitations of the PSA test. While it can be a useful tool for detecting potential prostate issues, it is not a definitive diagnostic test: it can yield false positives in cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia or inflammation, and it may also fail to detect some cancers. Furthermore, detecting cancer does not necessarily mean that it will progress or that it requires immediate treatment.
The problem is that an elevated result can trigger a cascade of further tests, biopsies, anxiety, and treatments with significant side effects—while a normal result, conversely, does not guarantee the absence of disease.
We need an approach to medicine that interprets PSA levels within their proper context—considering trends over time, age, symptoms, and risk factors—and that utilizes complementary tools, such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), when indicated.
Preventive measures—including a healthy diet, regular exercise, and sound lifestyle habits—are also important for overall health, though they do not guarantee the prevention of prostate cancer.
The goal should not be to detect and treat every anomaly at any cost, but rather to identify those individuals who would truly benefit from an intervention, thereby avoiding overdiagnosis and unnecessary treatments.------------------------
-----1) PSA Screening: Promise, Pitfalls, and the Future of Prostate Cancer Detection
The medical system rests on an inversion so complete that pointing it out sounds like madness. The inversion is this: the body’s healing responses are classified as diseases requiring suppression, while the causes of those responses go unaddressed. When you understand this, the entire edifice of modern medicine becomes legible. Healing gets labelled as disease. The label generates a billing code. The code justifies a prescription. The prescription generates revenue and side effects that require further diagnosis. The incentive to perpetuate this cycle is built into every layer of the system. The seventy thousand disease names are not discoveries of distinct pathological entities. They are descriptions of the body’s various adaptive responses—inflammation, fever, discharge, pain, fatigue, cellular changes—packaged into billable categories. The symptoms are real, the suffering is real, but the framework that converts symptoms into diseases, diseases into diagnoses, and diagnoses into treatment protocols is artificial. It exists to generate revenue. A cured patient is a lost customer. A managed patient is an annuity.
Four Causes, Seventy Thousand Diseases. ~ (Jan 2026) {unbekoming substack}
Yes Mark, pharmaceutical companies have been involved in numerous crimes, including marketing drugs for unapproved uses (off-label promotion), providing illegal kickbacks, and concealing safety data. Other offenses include manufacturing defective or contaminated drugs, fraudulent safety testing, overcharging government programs, and, in some cases, causing patient deaths through their actions or inaction.
Peter C. Gøtzsche greatest contribution to public health was when he, in 2010, opened the archives of clinical study reports in the European Medicines Agency after a 3-year long battle that involved a complaint to the European Ombudsman. EMA was solely concerned with protecting the drug industry's interests while ignoring those of the patients. The Ombudsman ruled there was no commercially confident information in the study reports.
Peter has published over 100 papers in “the big five” (BMJ, Lancet, JAMA, Annals of Internal Medicine and New England Journal of Medicine) and his scientific works have been cited over 190,000 times (his H-index is 91 according to Web of Science, June 2023, which means that 91 papers have been cited at least 91 times). Peter is the author of several books. The most recent ones are:
---Critical psychiatry textbook (2022).
---The Chinese virus: Killed millions and scientific freedom (2022).
---Mental health survival kit and withdrawal from psychiatric drugs: a user’s guide (2022, in 7 languages).
---The decline and fall of the Cochrane empire (2022)
---Vaccines: truth, lies and controversy (2021, in 7 languages).
---Survival in an overmedicated world: Find the evidence yourself (2019, in 7 languages).
---Death of a whistleblower and Cochrane’s moral collapse (2019).
---Deadly psychiatry and organized denial (2015, in 9 languages).
---Deadly medicines and organized crime: How big pharma has corrupted health care (2013, in 18 languages). Winner, British Medical Association’s Annual Book Award, Basis of Medicine in 2014.
---Mammography screening: truth, lies and controversy (2012). Winner of the Prescrire Prize in 2012.
---Rational diagnosis and treatment: evidence-based clinical decision-making (2007).
In a new article published in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, Peter Gøtzsche confronts the precarious position of whistleblowers who expose the pharmaceutical industry.
Academic journals typically do not publish anonymous articles, and anonymous sources raise suspicions. While Gøtzsche acknowledges that named authorship is important in some contexts, he also argues that speaking out about the corruption of academia and medicine by industry money has disastrous professional consequences and discourages many potential whistleblowers from coming forward. Therefore, to protect against industry corruption and prevent lives lost due to prescription drug deaths, he argues that we must allow anonymity in authorship and for sources speaking from within the industry.
"Healthcare is heavily influenced by vested interests, which are often financial, but academic prestige and the protection of professional interests also play a significant role. If anonymous reporting is not permitted, many potential whistleblowers would prefer to remain silent, even though coming forward would serve the public interest and could save many lives, particularly by reducing deaths from prescription drugs. This is especially important since medications are the third leading cause of death in the Western world." Numerous authors have written about the overwhelming corruption within academia and medicine, primarily due to pharmaceutical industry money. From research to medical practice, there are few areas where industry money cannot reach.
Thank you for sharing this interesting report and for opening such a necessary debate about modern medicine. I believe we must keep one fundamental point in mind: the best way to avoid illness—and, consequently, many diagnoses and treatments—is to prioritize prevention before a problem arises.
A healthy diet, based primarily on natural, minimally processed foods; regular physical activity; restorative sleep; stress management; and healthy lifestyle habits can all play a decisive role in reducing the risk of numerous chronic diseases.
We cannot prevent everything, as factors such as genetics, age, and other elements beyond our control also come into play. However, we can certainly address many modifiable factors, and we should stop viewing as inevitable those conditions that are, at least in part, preventable.
Medicine should not be limited to diagnosing and treating the consequences of illness; it should place much greater emphasis on preventing diseases from occurring in the first place. Investing in prevention is an investment in health, autonomy, and quality of life.
Cholesterol isn’t everything. Consider other risks before deciding on statins.
Key cardiovascular disease risks:
1. High ApoB / LDL
Primary cause of atherosclerosis
2. Hypertension
Ongoing vascular damage, even starting at 120/80
3. Insulin resistance / diabetes
The core of metabolic risk
4. Chronic inflammation
A risk factor independent of cholesterol
5. Visceral obesity
6. Sedentary lifestyle
Low VO₂max = high risk
7. Poor diet (ultra-processed foods)
8. Tobacco use
9. Poor sleep
10. Pollution
CRP is a clinically relevant predictor of cardiovascular events in individuals without known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, supporting its assessment in primary prevention. Greater importance for cardiovascular risk = ApoB + inflammation + metabolism (insulin/visceral)
The comparison between medicine and religious rituals is an interesting one, especially when patients follow procedures without fully understanding their purpose. But I hesitate to put all twelve practices in the same category. Overdiagnosis deserves serious attention, yet a screening test can have benefits and risks that vary considerably from person to person. I'd like to see that distinction explored more carefully.
Computed tomography (CT) scans are overused in the United States and could account for up to 5% of all cancer cases in the near future. This is the primary conclusion of a study published this Monday in the journal *JAMA Internal Medicine*, which tallied approximately 93 million CT scans performed in 2023; the authors estimate that the radiation from these procedures could lead to 103,000 future cancer cases. The researchers note that this figure is 3 to 4 times higher than previous estimates.
Computed tomography (CT) is widely used to detect tumors and diagnose numerous diseases. Since 2007, the annual number of such examinations in the United States has risen by 30%—a continuing upward trend.
At the same time, CT scans expose patients to ionizing radiation (which causes potentially carcinogenic DNA mutations), and it has long been known that this technology carries an increased cancer risk. Specifically, the radiation received during these tests can lead to lung cancer, breast cancer, and other types of tumors. The risk is highest for infants, followed by children and adolescents.
In 2023, an international study conducted by scientists at ISGlobal in Barcelona highlighted the impact of radiation exposure, estimating that for every 10,000 children examined using this technique, one or two could develop a blood cancer within the following 12 years as a result of that exposure.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2832778 (2025).--
OMG, YES!
In Australia, I had SO many patients referred for CT scans the longer I worked in my chiropractic career. For simple things. For things where a basic X-ray would be far more useful. In most cases the CT scan was not even warranted, IMO. The docs were too lazy to even take basic patient histories, so they sent their patients off to get fried, and would almost always only read the report, not view the scans themselves.
The number of patients I had to show exactly where their disc bulge or other such problem was on the scan? My gosh. Too many!! The poor patients weren't even shown what was what in their scans.
Early on in my career, docs often referred patients for basic X-rays, or even ultrasounds. And that was fine. The problem could be seen most of the time and the patient had minimal radiation. But as soon as docs got wind of ways they could make more $$ (ie referring for CT scans or MRIs), they used those. But of course they'd prefer the CT scans over MRI because they got better pay for that themselves, and not only was MRI invented AFTER CT, thus MRI had reasonable patient out-of-pocket expenses associated with it, $$ that did not find its way back to the doc, all the (big) hospitals ended up having CT scanners, not MRI machines, due to the invention timeline, so they were commonplace, and so yeah, the docs just handed out referrals for CT scans like candy. It was - and still is - so wrong.
I was the one left to explain about the radiation risks to my country patients - because I actually cared about my patients! So at least people knew they were getting about 1 year of day-to-day radiation (eg from the sun, bricks in the wall, appliances etc) from a brain CT scan, 2 years for a spinal CT scan, about 5 years for an abdominal CT scan, and about 10 years for the same thing done with dye (because they do it twice!). Some new patients I saw came in with a WAD of CT scans they'd already had. I told them to never have another CT scan IN THEIR LIFE unless they were literally going to die not having it, because another scan could very well cause them cancer - if they weren't already on the path to that by then!
The utter evilness the medical profession gets away with is horrendous. The docs rarely do their jobs properly. But they have no problem raking in the cash. Patients are almost NEVER fully informed. But they're the ones who take the full brunt of the referral, treatment etc - and in this case, radiation.
Thank you for using your own experience to shed light on a grim reality. The United States has built a healthcare system with corrupt incentives for doctors and the various entities involved in healthcare—incentives that inevitably lead to terrible and perverse outcomes. These incentives do not prioritize health and well-being. Vaccines can impair the natural immune system, and drugs often distort a child’s normal physiological responses, such as a moderate fever. Factors like nutrition, exercise, education, emotional security, our natural environment, and public safety are overlooked. Research studies funded by the pharmaceutical industry fail to analyze the risks posed by the cumulative and synergistic effects—not only of vaccines themselves but also of pharmaceutical treatments designed to suppress symptoms rather than address the underlying illness. Furthermore, environmental pollution leaves a significant mark on our health, contributing to a wide range of chronic diseases in adulthood—diseases that, in turn, swell the multi-billion-dollar revenues of the pharmaceutical industry and the puppets who dance to its tune.
In USA I suspect a lot of these MDs following the "script" to keep clients on "forever meds" is b/c they have very expensive mortgages, and/or vacation homes/excursions. Could the same apply to Australia?
I think so - I think anywhere where the prevailing ideology of mainstream medicine is prevalent, we can expect the same wayward activities to apply.
Before resorting to statins—which carry serious health risks—one should consider diet and healthy lifestyle habits. Additionally, there are supplements such as psyllium, berberine, pantethine, phytosterols, bergamot, olive extract, and artichoke extract, among others. These work through various mechanisms that complement one another and can yield excellent results, all without the drawbacks associated with statins.
New guidelines from the American Heart Association could reduce the number of adults eligible for statin therapy. Under these new guidelines, approximately 40% fewer people will meet the criteria to receive statins.
The 2023 PREVENT equations provide a more comprehensive assessment of cardiovascular risk than previous guidelines; they remove race as a factor and incorporate additional health indicators, such as kidney disease and obesity.
A cross-sectional study published in *JAMA Internal Medicine* suggests that if the PREVENT equations are adopted into national guidelines, approximately 40% fewer people would qualify for statin treatment.
The study, which analyzed data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2017–March 2020), included a weighted sample of 3,785 U.S. adults aged 40 to 75 with no known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).
https://scitechdaily.com/new-cholesterol-guidelines-could-drastically-reduce-statin-use-for-millions/ (2024)
Some physicians have pressured patients to take various medications, even threatening to discontinue their care if they refused to follow the prescribed treatment. There are two distinct perspectives regarding statin medications.
Proponents of statins focus on how these cholesterol-lowering drugs save lives. Critics of statins focus on how these medications can harm one's health. What is the correct perspective? Find out at the link below.
https://nervedoctors.com/the-truth-behind-statins/
Statins reduce Coenzyme Q10, increasing the risk of dementia and cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, fatigue, joint and muscle pain, diabetes, depression, cancer, cataracts, and glaucoma have been associated with statin use.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23833125/
https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation?PaperID=34065
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/1691918
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12991-017-0144-4
And yes, I'd caution my patients on the use of statins as well!! So few got off them. Some did, though. I recall one patient had such terrible muscle pains he had to quit taking them. His daughter, who actually worked for a cardiovascular specialist, was adamant he keep taking them. Put it this way: my patient was very happy off the statins!! He got his life back!
Yes yes yes, but it's so much EASIER to just take a statin, say the lazy doctors...and of course their poor patients are none the wiser... :-(
CANADIAN STUDY. A Canadian study of 89,835 women regarding mammography.
The Canadian National Breast Screening Study followed 89,835 women aged 40–59 for 25 years.
It found:
• cumulative breast cancer mortality: practically the same;
• mortality hazard ratio (HR): 0.99 (95% CI 0.88–1.12);
• 106 additional persistent cancers in the mammography group;
• the authors estimated that 22% of the invasive cancers detected through screening were overdiagnosed.
Conclusion: Annual mammography in women aged 40–59 does not reduce breast cancer mortality beyond what is achieved through physical examination or usual care, in a setting where adjuvant therapy for breast cancer is readily available. Overall, 22% (106/484) of screen-detected invasive breast cancers were overdiagnosed, which amounts to one overdiagnosed breast cancer for every 424 women who underwent mammography screening in the trial.
https://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g366?utm.com (2014)
Maybe the medical profession actually liked the the 'null' result because it wasn't like MORE people were dying due to the physicals, so they couldn't be seen as HARMING anyone per se...and the bonus was that the docs got more diagnoses out of it ie more money!!
If you're in the business of making money, it's an ideal result! Because if you have to actually HELP your patients (heaven forbid that those annual checks might actually HELP the patient!) then patients have a clear benchmark. If you're then seen as not helping them later on, well, you're now failing. Causing issues! It gets a bit...messy. And blame is assigned.
But if you were never helping, or hindering, to begin with, just keeping it all on par, then you can't get blamed, can you?! And you STILL get to make more money!
The only ones not cottoning onto this concept are the ignorant patients.
Win-win...at least for the medicos.
Yes, Robyn, what is truly concerning is not that someone might question the pharmaceutical industry; rather, it would be concerning if we stopped doing so, given that the facts point to persistent corruption driven by economic interests.
The pharmaceutical industry handles vast sums of money and maintains inevitable relationships with governments, regulatory bodies, researchers, and scientific societies. For this very reason, conflicts of interest cannot be dismissed as mere administrative details—when they have the potential to influence decision-making, they become a public health issue.
This is not a conspiracy theory. The World Health Organization (WHO) itself acknowledges that conflicts of interest can introduce commercial bias into decision-making, thereby compromising public health and eroding trust in institutions. The WHO has also called for greater transparency regarding clinical trial data, pricing, patents, and research and development costs.
Therefore, we must demand something quite straightforward: complete and accessible data, the disclosure of all conflicts of interest, truly independent researchers, regulators free from commercial pressure, and public audits of decision-making processes.
When the manufacturer of a product is directly or indirectly involved in generating the evidence for it—when those who fund the research stand to benefit from the results, and when regulators fail to provide the information necessary for third parties to review their decisions—trust cannot simply be demanded; it must be earned.
If any company, researcher, official, or regulator has manipulated data, concealed information, or prioritized economic gain over the safety of citizens, they must be investigated and held accountable—regardless of who they are. This is a matter of critical importance, as such actions can lead to serious harm and even death.
We must ensure that no industry holds more power than scientific evidence, and that no regulatory body remains beyond the reach of public scrutiny.
*****SCIENCE REQUIRES NEITHER CENSORSHIP NOR PROPAGANDA; IT REQUIRES TRANSPARENCY, INDEPENDENCE, AND ACCOUNTABILITY.*****
If we actually had in place what you described, I don't think we'd have a pharmaceutical company left standing...! That is how bad the system is.
Having just turned 77, I have never received a flu vaccine. The key is to take care of one’s immune system through healthy food, exercise, avoiding stress by spending time in nature, and maintaining good levels of vitamin D.
I admire the excellent and responsible physicians Dr. Peter McCullough and Nicolas Hulscher for calling on U.S. Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to halt the distribution of these diabolical mRNA-based flu vaccines.
Regarding previous flu vaccines, McCullough concluded: "These data suggest that the enormous effort dedicated to vaccinating the general population is a waste of time and resources. If frail and elderly individuals do not experience a direct reduction in hospitalizations and deaths, then flu vaccination should be handled on an individual basis, depending on specific pulmonary and systemic risks." Now, those risks are compounded by this diabolical mRNA technology.
Vaccines must cease to be treated as a religion—a dogma of faith in their efficacy. When Dr. Humphries raised concerns that flu vaccines might cause renal failure, her colleagues dismissed her by invoking the "mythology" surrounding medicine’s most celebrated vaccines (for instance, "the head of internal medicine reminded me that 'smallpox was eradicated through vaccines, and polio was eradicated in the United States through vaccines'"). This prompted Humphries to examine that mythology and write the seminal book *Dissolving Illusions*, which precisely demonstrated why that narrative was a lie.
mRNA vaccines, in particular, have proven to be gravely dangerous. Just three months ago, in August 2025, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that the federal government would wind down mRNA vaccine development, canceling 22 contracts worth nearly half a billion dollars. An internal review had found that mRNA vaccines—particularly those aimed at respiratory viruses—had repeatedly “failed to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu.”
Confirmatory results regarding the failure of the seasonal influenza vaccine, as well as the fact that it causes an increased risk of acute respiratory infections (ARI) associated with confirmed non-influenza respiratory virus infections (RR, 4.40; 95% CI
https://blog.maryannedemasi.com/p/pfizers-mrna-flu-jab-flops?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1044435&post_id=179789553&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ue9x3&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email (Nov 25, 2025)).-
https://palexander.substack.com/p/influenza-vaccine-failure-uemura-48c?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=579356&post_id=183288201&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=ue9x3&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email (Jan 8, 2026)--
MAHA must incorporate at least one course on natural medicine into medical studies. The priority should be to maintain an immune system capable of defending against viruses and bacteria through proper nutrition and healthy lifestyle habits. Beyond staying in bed and sweating it out, there are other natural ingredients that can be used as remedies for the flu:--------------------------
NATURAL RELIEF FOR COLDS WITH ORGANIC INGREDIENTS
https://www.hetkleinstehuis.nl/en/blog/post/thyme-tea-cold-flu
https://www.vinmec.com/eng/article/is-ginger-water-effective-for-cough-en .----
FIGHT COLDS AND FLU WITH ECHINACEA
https://www.avogel.co.uk/health/immune-system/fight-colds-and-flu-with-echinacea/ .---
The middle link for Ginger water at vinmec.com didn't work for me.
https://www.vinmec.com/eng/blog/is-ginger-water-effective-for-cough-en ------------------------------------------------------------
Beyond staying in bed and sweating it out, there are other natural ingredients that can be used as remedies for the flu:
-----1) Honey with ginger: Helps expel mucus and acts against a dry cough. You can also mix it with lemon juice, heat it up, and gargle with the resulting liquid. Not recommended for children under two years of age.
----2) Onion: Much like garlic, simply include it—preferably raw—in the dishes you prepare.---- 3) Eucalyptus: Helps clear nasal passages. Boil it in water and use the steam for inhalation; cover yourself with a towel to trap the steam.
----4) Thyme: Another great ally for treating upper respiratory tract conditions. Use it in stews, add it to your tea, or inhale the steam by boiling it in water.---- 5) Cinnamon: Mix half a tablespoon of powdered cinnamon with a tablespoon of honey to soothe a cough. Add this paste to your tea or consume it three times a day.
HOW TO USE EUCALYPTUS OIL FOR COLDS AND FLU
https://www.bosistos.com.au/blogs/blog/how-to-use-eucalyptus-oil-for-colds-and-flu (2024).--
.---
Thank you for highlighting the serious limitations of the PSA test. While it can be a useful tool for detecting potential prostate issues, it is not a definitive diagnostic test: it can yield false positives in cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia or inflammation, and it may also fail to detect some cancers. Furthermore, detecting cancer does not necessarily mean that it will progress or that it requires immediate treatment.
The problem is that an elevated result can trigger a cascade of further tests, biopsies, anxiety, and treatments with significant side effects—while a normal result, conversely, does not guarantee the absence of disease.
We need an approach to medicine that interprets PSA levels within their proper context—considering trends over time, age, symptoms, and risk factors—and that utilizes complementary tools, such as multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), when indicated.
Preventive measures—including a healthy diet, regular exercise, and sound lifestyle habits—are also important for overall health, though they do not guarantee the prevention of prostate cancer.
The goal should not be to detect and treat every anomaly at any cost, but rather to identify those individuals who would truly benefit from an intervention, thereby avoiding overdiagnosis and unnecessary treatments.------------------------
-----1) PSA Screening: Promise, Pitfalls, and the Future of Prostate Cancer Detection
Cancer & Metabolic Healing
Jul 15, 2026
https://paulmarik.substack.com/p/psa-screening-promise-pitfalls-and
-----2) Preventing Prostate Cancer
Take action Now
Cancer & Metabolic Healing
Jul 14, 2026
https://paulmarik.substack.com/p/preventing-prostate-cancer
-----3) Prostate Cancer: When Less Treatment May Be More
Cancer & Metabolic Healing
Oct 12, 2026
https://paulmarik.substack.com/p/prostate-cancer-when-less-treatment?utm_source=publication-search
The medical system rests on an inversion so complete that pointing it out sounds like madness. The inversion is this: the body’s healing responses are classified as diseases requiring suppression, while the causes of those responses go unaddressed. When you understand this, the entire edifice of modern medicine becomes legible. Healing gets labelled as disease. The label generates a billing code. The code justifies a prescription. The prescription generates revenue and side effects that require further diagnosis. The incentive to perpetuate this cycle is built into every layer of the system. The seventy thousand disease names are not discoveries of distinct pathological entities. They are descriptions of the body’s various adaptive responses—inflammation, fever, discharge, pain, fatigue, cellular changes—packaged into billable categories. The symptoms are real, the suffering is real, but the framework that converts symptoms into diseases, diseases into diagnoses, and diagnoses into treatment protocols is artificial. It exists to generate revenue. A cured patient is a lost customer. A managed patient is an annuity.
Four Causes, Seventy Thousand Diseases. ~ (Jan 2026) {unbekoming substack}
Yes Mark, pharmaceutical companies have been involved in numerous crimes, including marketing drugs for unapproved uses (off-label promotion), providing illegal kickbacks, and concealing safety data. Other offenses include manufacturing defective or contaminated drugs, fraudulent safety testing, overcharging government programs, and, in some cases, causing patient deaths through their actions or inaction.
Peter C. Gøtzsche greatest contribution to public health was when he, in 2010, opened the archives of clinical study reports in the European Medicines Agency after a 3-year long battle that involved a complaint to the European Ombudsman. EMA was solely concerned with protecting the drug industry's interests while ignoring those of the patients. The Ombudsman ruled there was no commercially confident information in the study reports.
Peter has published over 100 papers in “the big five” (BMJ, Lancet, JAMA, Annals of Internal Medicine and New England Journal of Medicine) and his scientific works have been cited over 190,000 times (his H-index is 91 according to Web of Science, June 2023, which means that 91 papers have been cited at least 91 times). Peter is the author of several books. The most recent ones are:
---Critical psychiatry textbook (2022).
---The Chinese virus: Killed millions and scientific freedom (2022).
---Mental health survival kit and withdrawal from psychiatric drugs: a user’s guide (2022, in 7 languages).
---The decline and fall of the Cochrane empire (2022)
---Vaccines: truth, lies and controversy (2021, in 7 languages).
---Survival in an overmedicated world: Find the evidence yourself (2019, in 7 languages).
---Death of a whistleblower and Cochrane’s moral collapse (2019).
---Deadly psychiatry and organized denial (2015, in 9 languages).
---Deadly medicines and organized crime: How big pharma has corrupted health care (2013, in 18 languages). Winner, British Medical Association’s Annual Book Award, Basis of Medicine in 2014.
---Mammography screening: truth, lies and controversy (2012). Winner of the Prescrire Prize in 2012.
---Rational diagnosis and treatment: evidence-based clinical decision-making (2007).
In a new article published in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, Peter Gøtzsche confronts the precarious position of whistleblowers who expose the pharmaceutical industry.
Academic journals typically do not publish anonymous articles, and anonymous sources raise suspicions. While Gøtzsche acknowledges that named authorship is important in some contexts, he also argues that speaking out about the corruption of academia and medicine by industry money has disastrous professional consequences and discourages many potential whistleblowers from coming forward. Therefore, to protect against industry corruption and prevent lives lost due to prescription drug deaths, he argues that we must allow anonymity in authorship and for sources speaking from within the industry.
"Healthcare is heavily influenced by vested interests, which are often financial, but academic prestige and the protection of professional interests also play a significant role. If anonymous reporting is not permitted, many potential whistleblowers would prefer to remain silent, even though coming forward would serve the public interest and could save many lives, particularly by reducing deaths from prescription drugs. This is especially important since medications are the third leading cause of death in the Western world." Numerous authors have written about the overwhelming corruption within academia and medicine, primarily due to pharmaceutical industry money. From research to medical practice, there are few areas where industry money cannot reach.
https://www.madinamerica.com/2022/06/pharmaceutical-industry-fda-use-mob-tactics-silence-whistleblowers/ ---
https://ijme.in/articles/anonymous-authorship-may-reduce-prescription-drug-deaths/?galley=html
🔥🔥🔥- thank you for this succinct comment and reminder from the earlier works. Fits in perfectly!
Thank you. 🙏.
We reject the medical sacraments.
We reject the medical priesthood.
Kneeling instead before YHWH and his son, the True Great High Priest, the one mediator between God and human beings.
Thank you for sharing this interesting report and for opening such a necessary debate about modern medicine. I believe we must keep one fundamental point in mind: the best way to avoid illness—and, consequently, many diagnoses and treatments—is to prioritize prevention before a problem arises.
A healthy diet, based primarily on natural, minimally processed foods; regular physical activity; restorative sleep; stress management; and healthy lifestyle habits can all play a decisive role in reducing the risk of numerous chronic diseases.
We cannot prevent everything, as factors such as genetics, age, and other elements beyond our control also come into play. However, we can certainly address many modifiable factors, and we should stop viewing as inevitable those conditions that are, at least in part, preventable.
Medicine should not be limited to diagnosing and treating the consequences of illness; it should place much greater emphasis on preventing diseases from occurring in the first place. Investing in prevention is an investment in health, autonomy, and quality of life.
Cholesterol isn’t everything. Consider other risks before deciding on statins.
Key cardiovascular disease risks:
1. High ApoB / LDL
Primary cause of atherosclerosis
2. Hypertension
Ongoing vascular damage, even starting at 120/80
3. Insulin resistance / diabetes
The core of metabolic risk
4. Chronic inflammation
A risk factor independent of cholesterol
5. Visceral obesity
6. Sedentary lifestyle
Low VO₂max = high risk
7. Poor diet (ultra-processed foods)
8. Tobacco use
9. Poor sleep
10. Pollution
CRP is a clinically relevant predictor of cardiovascular events in individuals without known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, supporting its assessment in primary prevention. Greater importance for cardiovascular risk = ApoB + inflammation + metabolism (insulin/visceral)
https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jacc.2024.03.423?utm_source=chatgpt.com (2024)
https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/44/38/3720/7243210?utm_source=chatgpt.com (2023)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41569-023-00877-z (2023)
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001136?utm_source=chatgpt.com (2023)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/403412912_Oxidized_Low-
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12889-024-19358-0 (2024)
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cardiovascular-medicine/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2025.1649759/full?utm_source=chatgpt.com (2025)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2451847625000661?utm_source=chatgpt.com (2025)
https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/47/15/1799/8377304?guestAccessKey= (2026)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/400798254_Oxidized_Low-Density_Lipoprotein_as_an_Emerging_Biomarker_in_Atherosclerosis_Synthesis_and_Clinical_Implications_in_Cardiovascular_and_Metabolic_Diseases (2026)
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40292-025-00758-1 (2026)
https://academic.oup.com/eurjpc/article/33/5/729/8002987?guestAccessKey= (2026)
Frankly, this is creepy! Thank God, I'm free of the allopathic cult.
Stay out of their clutches is what I say.
The comparison between medicine and religious rituals is an interesting one, especially when patients follow procedures without fully understanding their purpose. But I hesitate to put all twelve practices in the same category. Overdiagnosis deserves serious attention, yet a screening test can have benefits and risks that vary considerably from person to person. I'd like to see that distinction explored more carefully.
Many thanks again. The analogy with the Catholic Church is apt given vaccination is an anagram of 'Icon Vatican'.
Re "Everyone could read the book. Everyone kept going to the temple anyway. That is the strange part."
Sounds like Stockholm Syndrome as they call it. Siding with the abusers. Stockholm Syndrome anagrams to:
- her sodomy monks tlc
They like getting pricked, oh dear. What a cult it is.
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/2022/04/21/the-ten-commandments-and-ten-covid-commandments-compared/
It doesn't work that way with nationalised healthcare...
Perhaps that's not such a bad thing...
It is not exactly the same but there is a strong and increasing correlation/overlap. The NHS for example is a sacred cow.