NEVER ENOUGH STUDIES/EVIDENCE
 Medical Mind Control  [back] Medical study ploys

[The main ploy in the MMR autism scandal, where the only studies actually studying the children are being submerged by epidemiology studies, another ploy in itself.  A game beloved by Pharma trolls giving the impression they are looking for the truth and would use it is provided with it.  Eg 'Harradine'.  Why would an Allopath want proof that Homeopathy or Nutritional medicine works?]

See: Looking were it ain't  Newsgroup pharma shills

Scientists used the excuse that there were never enough studies revealing the dangers of DDT and other dangerous pesticides to ban them. They also used this excuse around the issue of tobacco, claiming that more studies were needed before they could be certain that tobacco really caused lung cancer. Even the American Medical Association (AMA) was complicit in suppressing results of tobacco research. In 1964, the Surgeon General's report condemned smoking, however the AMA refused to endorse it. What was their reason? They needed more research. Actually what they really wanted was more money and they got it from a consortium of tobacco companies who paid the AMA $18 million over the next nine years, during which the AMA said nothing about the dangers of smoking.
    The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), "after careful consideration of the extent to which cigarettes were used by physicians in practice," began accepting tobacco advertisements and money in 1933. State journals such as the New York State Journal of Medicine also began to run Chesterfield ads claiming that cigarettes are, "Just as pure as the water you drink… and practically untouched by human hands." In 1948, JAMA argued "more can be said in behalf of smoking as a form of escape from tension than against it… there does not seem to be any preponderance of evidence that would indicate the abolition of the use of tobacco as a substance contrary to the public health." Today, scientists continue to use the excuse that they need more studies before they will lend their support to restrict the inordinate use of drugs. Death by Medicine----Carolyn Dean, MD, ND, Martin Feldman, MD, Gary Null, PhD, Debora Rasio, MD (2003/4)

[NVIC June 14, 2006] Pencil Pushers Deny Vaccine/Optic Neuritis Link
Public health officials and medical doctors promoting forced use of use of hepatitis B, influenza, anthrax and smallpox vaccines in the military and civilian life have a vested interest in denying an association between vaccination and serious chronic diseases, such as MS.   Those determined to deny an association between vaccine induced inflammatory conditions in the body usually like to use retrospective, case controlled "studies" that look at old medical records. Using pencils and calculators to dismiss causal associations between vaccines and chronic diseases is easier than having to look at real live patients or study what happens to their blood, urine, eyes, brain, colons, etc. after vaccination.   The pathetic attempts by the pencil pushers to write off onset of brain and immune system dysfunction after vaccination in previously healthy people as just a "coincidence" will not wash. The people, whose lives have been ruined by doctors too proud to admit the harm being done, will not let them get away with it.

The Government's scientists will often ask for conclusive proof when they are challenged. It is a word often used when you wish to win your side of the argument. Scientifically conclusive proof is impossible to obtain – let me explain.
     I was at a legal hearing in Torquay representing a community and the barrister representing the communications industry said "there is no conclusive proof that these microwaves will cause damage". I argued: if somebody stood up and shot me in this courtroom there would be three levels of proof. You would have everybody as a witness and that would be accepted in a Court of Law. A pathologist could perform a post mortem, decide that the bullet killed me and that would be a second level of proof. If, however you wanted conclusive proof that the bullet killed me, you would have to argue that at the split second the bullet went into my body every system in my body was working perfectly because there are thousands of reasons why I could drop dead on the spot before the bullet went in and you would have to prove conclusively that all of these systems were working perfectly before the bullet went in. Clearly, this is scientifically impossible; there is no such thing as conclusive proof, yet it is what is demanded by government scientists when challenging their decisions. Confidential Report on TETRA for the Police of England and Wales by B Trower

[Here is a denial classic.] I asked you for evidence that demonstrated that deaths were actually caused by the Urabe strain, and you have singularly failed to provide any evidence whatsoever. You have provided media reports, opinions of parents, and decisions of tribunals or courts. These are not evidence of causality that implicates the Urabe vaccine.  Nobody would disagree that deaths have been reported after MMR vaccines. But deaths after vaccination are very different from deaths caused by vaccination.
 Dr David Salisbury, director of immunisation, department of health, London 19.03.07 [2007] Parliament was given false MMR assurance