10 Years of Cancer Research...Useless!

Medical science is rampant with fraud! At the Mayo Clinic, ten years of research that appeared to be leading towards harnessing the immune system to fight cancer is worthless because of fraudulent studies and also the later research based on the fraudulent ones. Editor of The Lancet, Richard Horton, says, "Fraudulent research is a scar on the moral body of science".

Retraction of medical research papers is at an all-time high. Though error was cited at a 3 to 1 rate over fraud, one must seriously question whether simple error is the primary reason. After all, these studies are peer-reviewed. They are supposed to have passed rigorous examination. But, what's the reality? The reality is that flaws in much of medical research are blatant. Often, merely examining a study, instead of taking it a face value, demonstrates that the conclusions are not supported by the evidence.

Nonetheless, those same studies are cited as evidence of efficacy of drugs and procedures. Even after papers have been retracted, the impression they've given doesn't disappear. Further research based on those papers is already designed and in process. Unfortunately, doctors are loathe to change their practices on the basis of bad studies. Changes are made more readily as new drugs and procedures are advocated, not as old ones are discredited. So the fraud is perpetrated on the unsuspecting patient.

Why so much Fraud in medical Studies? There is a tremendous amount to be gained by getting away with medical fraud. According to Dr Horton, a single paper published in Lancet and you get your academic chair and your get your money. It's your passport to success. "It's all about money!", he states. Most peer reviewers are doing their own studies. They want to be able to publish too. Therefore, they are not particularly inclined to make negative comments. Obviously, they don't want to alienate the authors of papers, since they hope to become published themselves.

Peer review is a farce! The only kind of review that makes sense is using professional independent reviewers. Yet, for decades we've had peer review trotted out as the be-all and end-all in determining the legitimacy of research papers and passed off as good science.

The Way I See It....there is inherent corruption in conventional medicine. This system I described demonstrates that it is anything but strictly evidence based. A recent study has shown that only 10-15% of medical treatment is based on real evidence. It is obvious when you consider the constantly increasing rate of chronic disease. Also when you take a look at the advent of drug resistant diseases. Or look at the false claims of disease eradication through vaccines, when any rational look at the evidence shows that it's not modern medicine we need to thank, but adequate food, good water and good sanitation systems. More tragically, consider the rise of a new kind of Whooping Cough, 10 times more virulent than the old version and caused by the vaccine itself, while being blamed on the unvaccinated! Let's hope the fraud and pseudo-science that brought us....

• Vioxx, the pain medication that caused heart attacks


• the deeply flawed statin studies that hid adverse effects


• the antidepressant and antipsychotic studies that had no efficacy & bad side effects


• the misguided studies on lowering salt intake claiming greater health when it was found to cause a greater death rate.


• numerous other drug recalls and debunked surgical operations.....will decrease as a more vigilant population questions any and all treatment proposed to them.

While Dr Horton's comment about fraudulent studies being the "scar on the moral body of science" is true, the whole truth is far more disheartening. The entire system of conventional medicine treating symptoms and not the enhancing the body's inner doctor has become a scar on the psyche and soma of humans.