2023-09-07
With many questioning the efficacy of "the jabs", what does that say about the medical-pharmaceutical-industrial-regulatory complex in general?
Pfizer in particular is infamous for its past court judgements.
And if one branch of their product tree is so questionable, what other branches should we also be looking at?
Many pharmaceutical drugs are now aimed squarely at those who are not ill (vaccines head the list) and those who are not ill but may be "pre-ill" - for example, "pre-diabetic", or with elevated markers ("high cholesterol" etc) that are assumed to be indicative of incoming poor health and that of course can be "combatted" with more drugs such as statins.
The financial benefits to big pharma of treating otherwise still happily functioning people in case they should get sick (rather than waiting for them actually to become sick) are obvious (the customer base is enormously larger!) as are the real benefits to the genuine pre-patient of not falling sick.
So the principle of pre-treatment is unarguable, but what about the practice?
And why do doctors almost never (in my experience) enquire about our non-pharmaceutical intake other than fags and booze? "We are what we eat".
The Health Advisory and Recovery Team HART has some suggestions to get us started.
