Recommended Gateway Pages

Home | Phrma's Tobacco Science Exposed--a list with linkis | Video Page. description of 200 documentaries with links | Books and Websites | Medical Association to challange Pharma | INDEX of articles in recommended sections | On JK's educational backgound | Pharma's Two Biggest Scam, heart disease and tranquiliziers | Psycotropic drugs are downers that harm | Professors exposing bad pharma in books | Why We Get Fat: how bad diet screws the weight regulatory system
Phrma's Tobacco Science Exposed--a list with linkis

This is an early draft-to be updated: 

List of topics I have researched and to which I have a position paper on, or at least covered that topic as part of a larger area of research I posted.  The Links are aides for your evaluation of my claims

The terminology in the material is for a healthcare professional, for my dictionary of definitions click on link.

Acetaminophen (paracetamol, APAP) for mild to moderate pain, It is a COX 1 & 2 inhibitor, and like others very significantly increases the risk of heart attacks, though the opposite is widely believed as to being a COX inhibitor.  Experiments by a German team exposed the flaw in current analysis of COX inhibition and APAP, and population studies have shown a significant association with asthma, rhino-conjunctivitis, and eczema, and certainly much more if national data banks are open for examination—links to this and more.  /rc/id5.html

Anticoagulants prevent ischemic events, I covered only two of them compared to aspirin.  The benefits of aspirin based on very extensive research of the literature has caused me to conclude that all those with a significant risk of ischemic event and/or cancer should be taking aspirin (325-650 mgs uncoated), and not what  Pharma offers.  

Antioxidants supplements have no health benefit other than lowering the incidents of age spots on the skin according to pharma.  I came to believe this when I purchased a seminal review book in 1984.  By 2009, I came to believe the opposite and posted my research support the fat soluble CoQ10 and the water soluble vitamin C; in 2017, I added E based on BMJ review article.

Arrhythmia drugs long term studies show that they promote arrhythmia, in Bad Pharma Supra Prof. Goldacre (pages) recounts how they were once prescribed following a MI, and this caused a minimum of 100,000 excess deaths. 

Aspirin pose a major risk for ulcers and Reyes syndrome; neither is true. 

Aspirin to protect the public pharma claims that low dose enteric coated are the safest form, and it shouldn’t be taken on an empty stomach.  I found 2 older studies that showed enteric coating delays absorption from 5 to 8 hours, and thus the peak level was much less than with the uncoated aspirin.; also found were two studies which measured tolerance as to blood clotting and found that over 80% at one year out had become tolerant to that action of aspirin. 

Cancer, promoting the 6 mutation theory (for which they have many poisonous drugs based on that theory) and thus justify drugs to counteract those changes.  Pharma ignores its real causes the Western diet and rare swap of DNA with precancerous cells.  In 2007 I started to doubt the mutation theory and believed that probably stem cell were the cause of metastatic cancer, later switched to pluripotent cells.  In 2015, I read an articles on starving cancer, and then a seminal article on the role of macrophages and their gene swapping with tumors.  Anaerobic metabolism is believe the way cancer cells avoid apoptosis (orderly dismantling) of abnormal cells, and the gene swap with macrophages enables the tumor cells to evade the immune system when they spread to different tissues.  

Cancer starving with fasting and ketogenic diet.  Ignored is the defective metabolism of cancer cells (demonstrated in 1924) by Otto Warburg Nobel Laurate:  they can only metabolize glucose anaerobically—not fats. 

Cancer treatments, very few can cure metastatic cancer, and if the cancer is but stage 1-3, chemotherapy doesn’t prevent the cancer from becoming metastatic—with a few exceptions based on type of cancer.  Giving chemotherapy to a person who through excision or radiation has been cured on the basis that some might be missed and the chemo will destroy that missed cancer is marketing crap.  If the chemo can’t cure stage IV, then it won’t destroy any remaining cancer missed.  Those who undergo unnecessarily chemo have shortened their life and damage their health including their brain --see chemobrain, and.  Shrinking a tumor short term doesn’t equate to extended life since often the most aggressive cancer cells have survived.  See Linus Pauling trial of terminal patients comparing an untreated group to those given vitamin C.  If I had cancer I would limit treatment to excision, or if inoperable to having the cancer irradiated. 

Calcium supplements do not prevent osteoporosis, and there is some evidence to suggest that excess calcium with our Western high sugar diet promotes atherosclerosis.   Add Fung on calcium

Cardiovascular disease & heart attacks, covers a long list of what is in pharma’s interest, and also includes a section on what is the major cause for the formation of plaque , bacteria within the artery walls that causes an immune response.

Cholesterol myth and id5, relies upon Uffe Ravhskov and DD Adams articles, and others published elsewhere on my site.

Collagen defective is ignored and instead high serum glucose is tagged as the cause for the comorbidities associated with type-two diabetes.  The theory of oxidative stress due to high glucose as causal for diabetics has several counter examples.  Though studies are lacking, I suspect that the same causality for the conditions of the Western diet also apply to those who are Insulin resistant to a lesser extent.  There is an issue with the functioning of ascorbate in the polyol pathway that produces collagens, and there is some evidence for the use of mega dose of ascorbate/myo-inositol.   

CoQ10 does not promote health, the basic biology says the opposite, as does some studies.

Estradiol Used in HRT

Healthful substances attacked as bad testosterone, estradiol (HRT), HGH, DHEA, progesterone (which should be added to estradiol, and possible testosterone0. 

Healthful choices ignored and poor to useless choice promoted, useless, vitamin C, vitamin E (both to be taken in high doses as antioxidant) and offering low dose; intensive cardio-exercise while walking is encouraged, niacin (see below for more on it)

Heart burn is not considered pathological and thus is treated with protein pump inhibitors instead of the cause H pylori.   H. pylori is associated with a 75% increased risk for MI.   

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) for women have only minor benefits and major risks.

Hormone replacement therapy for men (testosterone)

Hyperglycemia (diabetes) is the main cause of the comorbidities associated with T2D (but not extended to insulin resistance which goes untreated). The main causes of the comorbidities is defective collagen produced by a compromised polyol pathway. 

Hypertension is not a disease but a sign of an underlying pathology.[1]  Hypertension drugs do not significantly reduce risks associated with CVD, because lowering blood pressure doesn’t undo existing CVD or reduce the rate of formation of new plaque. Hypertension is signs of other pathological conditions such as atherosclerosis (hard, clogged arteries) for in response the heart pumps harder to get an adequate supply of blood and thus oxygen to the brain and other organs.  Lowering blood pressure reduces quality of life and cognitive functions and functions of organs and tissues throughout the body, thus promoting other conditions. 

2nd, that sodium does not appreciable raise blood pressure.  3rd that lowering blood pressure has minimal effect upon the incidence of acute ischemic events (with the  exception of malignant hypertension, over 180). 

Insulin resistance is not considered a major pathological condition and thus is essentially ignored in clinical practice along with it product NAFLD.  Insulin resistance is the most significant causal factor for the age related conditions associated with the western diet (conditions that are rare among aboriginal peoples).

LDL is not the bad form of cholesterol.  LDL has besides transporting triglycerides and cholesterol to areas of growth and repair a second function of neutralize toxins excreted by bacteria. 

Lipid hypothesis, that Hypercholesterolemia when lowered does not reduce the rate of ischemic events. 1) high serum cholesterol is not causal for heart attacks.  2) cholesterol is only a minor constituent of atheromas.  3) the presence of LDL and its content s of  cholesterol and triglycerides in atheroma is a result of a response to inflammation and LDL is actively transported by endothelial cells on the artery walls to promote the healing process. 

Lowering cholesterol by giving medication during the day.  About 80% of cholesterol is made by the liver, and this occurs at night. 

Meditaranean diet is healthy because of the high consumption of olive oil; wrong it is the lower consumption of sugar. 

Niacin giving it during the day, and in a very high dose which causes the unpleasant flush. 

Saturated fats promote atherosclerosis and thus are “heart unhealthy”.  The opposite is the case, the polyunsaturated fats re unhealthy because of their double bond which is available for attachment to by reactive chemicals, which is a healthy issue when it occurs within cells in sufficient amounts.   

Vitamin C taken in a large dose as an antioxidant

[1]   A possible exception:  malignant hypertension 180 over 110 probably when significantly lowered might benefit the patient more than the harm done by side effects.

Enter content here

List of pharma’s accepted tobacco science--found in medical text books, medical Journals, and taught in CME classes

Think of yourself as the CEO of Pfizer, who worked himself to the top of the marketing department:  a 20 year track record of maximizing profits.  The business model of your industry is to put profits before people.  With corporations as the shadow government this is the norm.  Thus with the support of corporate media big business has sold most of the public on that they improve lives.  No industry advertises that more than pharma.  The reality is, taken as a whole, the opposite.  You as CEO care no more for our customers than R.J. Reynolds does for their customers who smoke Camel cigarettes (I call it tobacco ethics). 

Reader, you know all that, even if you trust your well-meaning doctor (click on link which SYMPATHICALLY explains their conditions of work and continuing education).  A quote by Bernard Evens sets out concisely what pharma has accomplished:   “The pharmaceutical industry is the most lucrative, the most cynical and the least ethical of all the industries.  It is like an octopus with tentacles that has infiltrated all the decision-making bodies:  world health organizations, government agencies, parliaments, high administrations in health and hospitals and the medical profession."  From an interview published in The Guardian Sept 2012. Which highlighted his and Dr. Bernard’s (a member of the French Parliament exposing that over half the prescription drugs were dangerous and useless—link to interview.     

With this website in 2004 I set out to sort through the good and bad of medical science.   I am uniquely qualified by education, continuing studies, a broad knowledge of medicine based on decades of study, an awareness of how corporations use scientists for hire, and a compulsion to arrive at the best evidence based answers.  No topic is more vital that my health; and I needed a website to focus my interest by publishing my answers.  The hired scientists publish what I call tobacco science—often ghost written. What follows is a listing of the evidence based answers, often with a few details and with links to the evidence I have posted.  You will be surprised at how deep the tentacles of pharma have penetrated the evidence base to promote drugs sales. 

As professor Ben Goldacre put it in Bad Pharma “A perverse system produces perverse results”, and as he suggests we cannot change human nature, therefore we need to change the corporate incentives.  Short of that gargantuan task, we ought to allow the rational side of our brain to investigate and guide.   

I am not alone is this critique, the leading English journals publish in most issues an article that differ with tobacco science—link and more.  Professors and some physicians have published books on the crap pharma has generated—link.  What follows below is about the evidence base for I believe is prudent health choices.  It is there for you.  


Aware of the patterns of production of misinformation, I cherry pick the journal articles because of the corrupt worked by their tobacco science.[1]    There is a fundamental conflict between maximizing profits and health:  Pharma is in the business of treating chronic conditions, many of which they and the food manufacturers cause.  Below are some of the patterns of deception I found in their medical journal articless.    

First:  Positive bias in clinical trials is the norm—a study in the NEJM compared the raw data to published articles & found positive bias averages 32%--in NEJM.  What else can industry designed and funded studies of their drugs be?  This confirms in the NEJM supports Dr. Bernard’s book.  Doctors are prescribing drugs based on tobacco science.  Prof. Ben Goldacre’s book, Bad Pharma, makes the broken evidence base the theme.  Because of this we are given drugs that in most cases do more harm than good. 

Second:  Meta studies in most cases build upon biased trials:  they summarize the tobacco science. 

Third, side effects are grossly underestimated:  Pharma’s mantra is “safe and effective”.  This mantra is repeated by the media, in journal articles, medical textbooks, class to medical student, and to physicians in the required Continuing Medical Education (CME) class that are nearly always funded by pharma, and thus are in reality done to promote drugs.  Pharma is not in the education business.  The reporting of side effects has been handed over by the FDA to the company marketing the drug.  Pharma’s clinical trials by design understate side effects. 

Forth, new patented drugs are better than off patent older drugs.  The patent drug’s marketing theme is safer and more effective than the older off patent ones.   

Fifth healthful popular interventions are through tobacco science shown to be ineffective, and if possible harmful.  Examples are the use of 325 mg aspirin, Atkin’s diet, and multiple grams of vitamin C.  Others are mostly ignored, such as CoQ10 and starving cancer with fasting and very low carb diet. 

Sixth, creating cognitive dissonance through over information and through conflicting information.

Seventh, promoting a drug or supplement as first line, then when it fails to work, to recommend drugs.  Thus low salt diet to lower hypertension and calcium supplement to improve bone density for osteopenia.

Eighth, healthful, cheap, and recommended by physicians, then it is very likely to be ineffective and with serious side effects, or at best just bad advice. 

Second is studies done to show a healthful drug or supplement isn’t.  Pharma is in the business of treating illness.

For example pharma and thus corporate media have been going after opiates and offering as replacement sedatives for mild and moderate pain—which of course doesn’t reduce pain, just the awareness of the pain.  And the sedatives are more addicting than opiates, which pharma vigorously denies, like once tobacco companies denying that cigarettes cause cancer.

Every major avenue has been tweaked for profits by pharma.  Below is a list of areas I have researched, summarized my research and posted this summary, and also posted the journal articles in support of my findings.  You’d be surprised at how many rocks of medicine are on a foundation of tobacco slime. 


[1] That a journal article conflicts  with pharma’s tobacco science is strong evidence that its supported by compelling evidence; otherwise it would not pass peer review.  Thus in fact I am not cherry picking, but using those quality articles as guidance. 


Harvard Prof. Dr. Marcia Angell: “We certainly are in a health care crisis, ... If we had set out to design the worst system that we could imagine, we couldn't have imagined one as bad as we have.”