British medical journal admits antipsychotic drugs kill far more people than terrorism

Based on the facts, U.S. Transportation Security Administration pat-downs and naked body scans belong at drug company factories, doctors’ offices, and drug stores, rather than at American airports. A new report published in the British Medical Journal has found that dangerous antipsychotic drugs are responsible for killing at least 1,800 dementia patients a year, which means that more people are killed by U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved dementia drugs every two years than died in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
For their study, researchers from Harvard Medical School tracked more than 75,000 dementia patients living in nursing homes that were being prescribed antipsychotic drugs like haloperidol (Haldol) and quetiapine (Seroquel) for their conditions. Antipsychotic drugs are not typically administered to dementia patients, which means this is an “atypical” or “off-label” use of these drugs, despite the fact than an increasing number of doctors and nursing home personnel are prescribing them to dementia patients.
In the end, it was confirmed by the team that the use of antipsychotics by dementia patients is responsible for a surge in drug-related deaths, presumably as a result of negative side effects both internally to the body, and externally in the form of altered behavior. The findings also confirmed previous ones that identified an uptick in at least 1,800 additional deaths a year as a result of dementia patients taking antipsychotic drugs.
“For a minority of people with dementia, antipsychotics should be used, but then only for up to 12 weeks, and under the correct circumstances,” said Dr. Anne Corbett, research manager at the Alzheimer’s Society, commenting on the research. “For the majority (of patients), they do far more harm than good.”
These 1,800 deaths, of course, are just the additional deaths caused by antipsychotic drugs when they are used for off-label purposes in those with dementia, which means there are tens of thousands — and perhaps even hundreds of thousands — of deaths every year in other patients taking antipsychotics for other purposes. This means that far more people die every single year than have ever died from so-called terrorist attacks.
According to the 2003 report Death by Medicine, which was authored by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio, and Dorothy Smith, more than 783,000 people in the U.S. die every year as a result of conventional medicine, which is more than 261 times more than the number who died on 9/11 (http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html).
You can read the entire Death by Medicine report here: http://www.webdc.com/pdfs/deathbymedicine.pdf
So with all this in mind, why is the U.S. government’s primary concern about terrorism these days when far more people die as a result of government-sanctioned medicine every single year?
Sources for this article include:
Advertisements

Rich people more unethical, much more likely to cheat and steal, study finds

Rich people are more unethical and likely to cheat, break the law or plain behave badly towards other people, a new study has found.

Madoff interview 2011 10 27

Disgraced former financier Bernard Madoff pleaded guilty to 11 federal felonies in March 2009 and was later sentenced to 150 years in prison

 

 

<And the most troubling thing is that most often they get away with it, no questions asked>

 

It may involve upper class people cutting off other motorists, lying in a negotiation, cheating to win a prize or even stealing candy from children, according to the Canadian Press, but researchers from the universities of California and Toronto found that wealthier people are more apt to behave unethically than those who had less money.

The study contradicted the notion that poor people are more likely to act unethically out of financial necessity.

Instead, the researchers wrote the “relative independence” and “increased privacy” of the wealthy make them more likely to act unethically.

Poorer people by contrast may be less likely to cheat, because they are more dependent on their community at large.

Rich people also shared “feelings of entitlement and inattention to the consequences of one’s actions on others” that may play into their moral decisions, study authors said.

The study, whose findings were published in the Proceedings of that National Academy of Sciences, analyzed a person’s rank in society as measured by wealth, occupational prestige and education, according to ABC News.

ABC quoted the authors as saying the differences in ethical behavior could be explained, at least in part, by the upper-class participants’ more favorable attitude toward greed.

“We found that it is much more prevalent for people in the higher ranks of society to see greed and self-interest … as good pursuits,” ABC quoted Paul Piff, lead author of the study and a doctoral candidate at Berkeley, as saying. “This resonates with a lot of current events these days.”

Media reports speculated that this was a reference to the behavior of such people as disgraced ponzi scheme operator Bernie Madoff.

CNN quoted Piff as saying: “Elevated wealth status seems to make you want even more, and that increased want leads you to bend the rules or break the rules to serve your self-interest.”

Meanwhile, the Canadian Press quoted Stephane Cote, associate professor of organizational behaviour and psychology at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management, as saying:

“We found a trend that upper-class individuals — people that have the most money, the most income, the best education and the most prestigious job — have a tendency to engage in less ethical behavior.

“This doesn’t mean that every rich person will behave less ethically than any less-rich person… But we found a tendency. So if you look across people in a variety of settings, the higher-class people tend to engage in more unethical behaviour.”

Piff said the results obviously did not apply to all wealthy people, noting the philanthropic contributions of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett.

NOTE Bill gates and the gates foundation are pro depopulation, forced vaccinations, sterility, funding Monsanto and much much much more