Hi again. To evolve we have to go beyond the known which does not seem to working we may have to look outside the box of the past and enter the space of the unknown which may hold clues to our future life and existence. It would take great courage and take us out of the comfort zone and the compass of direction we are now travelling.
UN Report: We Do NOT Need Pesticides to Feed the World… It’s a Myth
http://www.healthfreedoms.org/un-report-we-do-not-need-pesticides-to-feed-the-world-its-a-myth/
Researchers at Yale and Penn State Find Vaccines are Related to Brain Disorders
http://www.healthfreedoms.org/researchers-at-yale-and-penn-state-find-vaccines-are-related-to-brain-disorders/
These two reports are of mega, mega significance and just emphasises the corruption and devilry of major institutions that are meant to be for health and safety.
More about Vimana 13 mins
More supression 38 mins.
Remy-CNN a real fun 2 mins
NYPD has enough of Comey. 5mins
Creeppy Joe. 2 mins
A secret stash of research papers has been uncovered that gives new hope to families fighting for compensation after they claimed a pregnancy test resulted in their children being born with deformed limbs.
Hundreds of families claim that the hormone-based pregnancy test, Primodos, caused the deformities in the 1960s and 1970s, but they have never been able to establish a direct cause-and-effect link. Attempts to take the manufacturer, Schering, to court failed after legal aid was withdrawn.
The families are hoping that the discovery of thousands of papers in the Berlin National Archives may establish a link. The papers include correspondence between Dr Bill Inman, who created the UK's Yellow Card system for reporting reactions to drugs, and the manufacturer. In that, Inman said that pregnant women who took a hormone pregnancy test had "a five-to-one risk of giving birth to a child with malformations." A new warning was placed on Primodos packaging in 1975.
The papers will be reviewed by an expert panel that investigates hormone pregnancy tests.
Bayer, which took over Schering, claims that evidence that the test causes deformities is weak.(Courtesy WDDTY)
If your doctor says you have high blood pressure (hypertension), get a second opinion: around 20 per cent of cases have been wrongly diagnosed, usually because old and faulty instruments are still being used.
Around half of family doctors are using manual tensiometers to measure blood pressure readings, a survey of Canadian physicians has discovered. Instead, they should be using automatic devices that are more accurate, say researchers from the University of Montreal.
Sometimes the manual devices are faulty, but it could also be down to the doctor who should be taking two readings around 15 minutes apart, and few have the time to do that, says lead researcher Janusz Kacrorowski.
Automatic devices eliminate the risk of 'white coat syndrome', when a patient's blood pressure rises because of the stress of being in the doctor's surgery.
Although the devices are more expensive, it would eliminate the cost of antihypertensive drugs that are being wrongly prescribed.
AND
Scientists ar unable to reproduce the results of trials that had found a drug was effective, and which helped get it approved. Around 70 per cent of researchers say they have been unable to replicate the results of drug trials—which suggests they were falsified or given too much of a positive spin.AND
This 'reproducibility crisis' is putting a brake on further research and development, and goes against one of the fundamental principles of science that independent scientists can replicate the results.
In one test, Dr Tim Errington, an immunologist who runs the Reproducibility Project at the University of Virginia, tried to replicate the results from five major cancer trials, and yet despite spending two years on the studies, he was able to reproduce the results from just two of them. Two others were inconclusive and he was unable to replicate the results of the fifth trial.
"It's worrying because replication is supposed to be a hallmark of scientific integrity," Dr Errington said.
He's not alone. More than 70 per cent of researchers have been unable to reproduce results from medical trials—and it's because results are often made to look more impressive than they really are.
There's a number of reasons for this. Most trials are funded by the drug company whose product is being tested, and they need a positive result, and there's an impulse to get exciting results as that's good for the publication that prints the study, and for the universities where the researchers work, and for the researchers themselves whose careers are enhanced with 'breakthrough' research ( Courtesy WDDTY)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.