Allopathy an 'Evidence or Science-based' medicine lie
Medical Mind Control  Rationalization  Study ploys 

'Modern Medicine can’t survive without our faith, because Modern Medicine is neither an art nor a science. It’s a religion.'---Dr Robert Mendelsohn MD

[Another propaganda term taken/created by Allopathy (similar to vaccine-preventable-disease).  See the Wikipedia page for what you are meant to think here: " Evidence-based medicine is the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients."  Of course, you are meant to believe Allopathic (pharma) medicine is only used because it is based on sound evidence it works, unlike all Alternative medicine.  Firstly, apart from antibiotics, that is debatable it does anything at all for most diseases, and secondly, they have brushed under the table dozens of more effective medicines (e.g. Cancer, Nutritional Medicine), as well as the full story on the nature of most diseases.  This medicine is based around money. It is money-based-medicine masquerading as Evidence-based medicine.  Pretty obvious really, as why would they make such a big song and dance about it?
     Orac's other blog
Science-Based Medicine is an example (he stopped posting there.]

See: Consensus science   [2002] Vitamin C, Infectious Diseases, and Toxins: Curing the Incurable by Thomas E. Levy, M.D., J.D..]
: Suppress alternatives
Disease TheoryMedical Hoaxes

100% instant proof it is a lie: Vitamin C, and Michael Tellinger's presentation  demolishes the Evolution lie, and a few more.

[2012] Cancer Industry Exposed as Fraud “The Science is False”   Findings published in the journal Nature show that 88% of major studies on cancer that have been published in reputable journals over the years can not be reproduced to show their accuracy. This means that the research findings published are flat out false.  Author of the review and former head of cancer research at Amgen C. Glenn Begley was unable to replicate the results of 47 of the 53 studies he examined. This suggests that researchers are fabricating their findings simply to create the illusion of positive findings instead of publishing their actual results. This ensures the continuation of their steady stream of funding and grants.

[2011 Dec] Evidence-Based Medicine: Neither Good Evidence nor Good Medicine by Steve Hickey, PhD and Hilary Roberts, PhD

[2010 Sept] Non-Evidence based medicine, Part 1 by Hilary Butler
[2010 Sept] Non-Evidence based medicine, Part 2 by Hilary Butler
[2010 Sept] Non-Evidence based medicine, Part 3 by Hilary Butler

[2009] How Scientific Is Scientific Medicine? by Len Saputo, MD with Byron Belitsos


The Efficacy of Radiotherapy By Don Benjamin 

  “I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.
    “Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.
    There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”
“… Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E = mc². Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.””[2016 April 13] What’s with DeNiro’s Tribeca co-founder, Jane Rosenthal? BY JB HANDLEY


Viera Scheibner, Ph.D.  [pdf] A critique of the 16 page Australian pro vaccination booklet entitled “The Science of Immunisation: Questions and Answers”

Robert Mendelsohn M.D

Hoffer, M.D., Ph.D. , Abram

For the past 25 years, most of the laboratory research into metastatic breast cancer has been based on a single breast tumor cell line known as MDA-MB-435. At least 650 papers have been published on studies involving this cell line. Yet it has been revealed that this supposed breast cancer cell line may in fact not be composed of breast cancer cells at all. Instead, it appears that the cells are derived from melanoma. For 25 years, therefore, breast cancer research using this cell line - and it is one of the most widely used - has been based on an incorrect model. Melanoma-derived tumor cells are not biologically equivalent to breast cancer cells; they have different molecular and genetic characteristics. STARTLING REVELATION ABOUT BREAST CANCER RESEARCH

Of around 2500 treatments so far reviewed by the journal's distinguished team of advisors, peer reviewers, experts, information specialists and statisticians, only 13 percent have been found definitely beneficial. A further 23 percent are rated as likely to be beneficial; 8 percent can be classified as a trade off between benefits and harms; 6 percent as clearly unlikely to be beneficial; 4 percent are likely to be ineffective or harmful, and a whopping 46 percent - almost half of all treatments reviewed - are rated as being of unknown effectiveness. WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE? by Ralph Moss

"Allopathy : Also known as ‘scientific medicine’, ‘orthodox medicine’ and ‘modern medicine’, is barely about 200 years old. It lays emphasis on drugs. It offers antibiotics, synthetic vitamins, steroids, chemotherapy, radiation, and immunization all of which are highly dangerous. Its diagnostics methods are not foolproof and 95% of surgeries in allopathic hospitals are unnecessary. Doctors of modern medicine receive their continuing education from Medical Representatives of (P)harmaceuticals, and prescribe lethal drugs based on cuts and commission. These inadequately tested and prescribed drugs create more diseases. Allopathy is a ‘pseudo science’ which has done more harm to health and wellbeing of humanity than any other 40 odd systems of healing described below."----  A TO Z  OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE by Dr. Leo Rebello  (A chapter from Dr. Leo Rebello's popular book  AIDS and Alternative Medicine, 4th Edition)

Scientific medicine is one term accepted by these (allopathic) physicians. This name lays exclusive claim to a "scientific" foundation on a body of knowledge, derived from both research and observation, that is chronicled in peer-reviewed journals. It has a history of controlled, clinical studies; has a strong tradition of basic laboratory science; and is closely affiliated with medical schools and hospital research centers. But alternative practitioners, short on laboratory science but long on case reports, can also point to a historic collection of observations and data. With the NIH now enrolled as a sponsor, they will be soon publishing the results of more rigorous clinical studies, whatever their outcome, and may establish a stronger scientific foundation for their work. The term scientific medicine implies that other healing practices are not grounded in reality. It suggests, in a not so subtle manner, that alternative practices have no scientific or technological underpinnings, no systematization of facts, methods, or principles. Annals of Internal Medicine

"Despite the tendency of doctors to call modern medicine an 'inexact science', it is more accurate to say there is practically no science in modern medicine at all. Almost everything doctors do is based on a conjecture, a guess, a clinical impression, a whim, a hope, a wish, an opinion or a belief. In short, everything they do is based on anything but solid scientific evidence. Thus, medicine is not a science at all, but a belief system. Beliefs are held by every religion, including the Religion of Modern Medicine." Robert Mendelsohn MD Preface by Hans Ruesch to 1000 Doctors (and many more) Against Vivisection

"Most patients probably assume that when a doctor proposes to use an established treatment to conquer a disease he will be using a treatment which has been tested, examined and proven. But this is not the case. The savage truth is that most medical research is organised, paid for, commissioned or subsidised by the drug industry (and the food, tobacco and alcohol industries). This type of research is designed, quite simply, to find evidence showing a new product is of commercial value. The companies which commission such research are not terribly bothered about evidence; what they are looking for are conclusions which will enable them to sell their product. Drug company sponsored research is done more to get good reviews than to find out the truth."----Dr Vernon Coleman

"Today's medical training is based upon pronouncement and opinion rather than on investigation and scientific experience. In medical schools students are bombarded with information but denied the time or the opportunity to question the ex-cathedra statements which are made from an archaic medical culture. Time and again new treatments and new techniques are introduced on a massive scale without there being any scientific support for them and without doctors knowing what the long term consequences are likely to be. Instead of experimenting and then practising tried and trusted techniques, modern medical practitioners use all their patients as guinea pigs and practice their black art as a massive international experiment."----Dr Vernon Coleman

"Doctors go to great lengths to disguise the fact that they are practising a black art rather than a science. The medical profession has created a 'pseudoscience' of mammoth proportions and today's doctors rely on a vast variety of instruments and tests and pieces of equipment with which to explain and dignify their interventions. This, of course, is nothing new. The alchemists of the middle ages and the witch doctors of Africa realised that words and spells reeked of gods and sorcery and so they created a secret and impenetrable structure of herbs, songs, dance, rattling of special bones, chants and ceremonial incantations. Today's clinicians have much more sophisticated mumbo jumbo to offer. They have laser surgery and psychotherapy, CAT scanners and serum manganese assessments to substantiate their claims to be scientists. But however good the impenetrable pseudoscience may sound or seem to be, and however well based on scientific principles the equipments and the techniques is still little more than mumbo jumbo. Doctors may use scientific instruments but that doesn't make them scientists any more than a witch doctor would become a scientist if he wore a stethoscope and danced around a microscope!"----Dr Vernon Coleman

"Now, if doctors were aware that medicine was not a science and that they were pulling what is undoubtedly the largest and most successful confidence trick ever tried the damage would be fairly minimal. But the problem is compounded by the fact that the vast majority of doctors believe the lie that they are taught; they believe that they are scientists, practising an applied science."----Dr Vernon Coleman

"In the last century the practice of medicine has become no more than an adjunct to the pharmaceutical industry and the other aspects of the huge, powerful and immensely profitable health care industry. Medicine is no longer an independent profession. Doctors have become nothing more than a link connecting the pharmaceutical industry to the consumer."----Dr Vernon Coleman

Viera Scheibner, Ph.D.