Famous medical-journal editor torpedoes medical journal

by Jon Rappoport

May 1, 2017

(To join our email list, click here.)

“There is a system designed to affect every human on the planet, from cradle to grave. For each person, I’m talking about 30 or 40 diagnoses of physical and mental conditions, many of which are false; and treatment with toxic chemicals that progressively debilitate, confuse, weaken, and destroy health and life. What would you call this system? Who would you blame?” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Her name is Dr. Marcia Angell.

During her 20 years of work, she looked at, perused, and analyzed more medical studies than all mainstream science bloggers in the world put together.

You want to listen to an actual pro? Listen to her:

Marcia Angell, former editor of The New England Journal of Medicine, in the NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption”:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

Before you count Dr. Angell as a hero, consider this: why didn’t she blow the whistle loud and clear while she was editing The New England Journal? Why didn’t she burn her own Journal down to the ground? After all, she was publishing studies of clinical trials of new drugs, and those fake studies were praising the drugs as safe and effective.

And therefore, The New England Journal was aiding and abetting a crime—unleashing dangerous and ineffective drugs on the public.

Her Journal was responsible for that.

Yes, the dreaded R word. Responsibility. In many circles these days, it’s not a popular term.

Take drug companies, for example. As I wrote in a recent piece, when lawsuits are launched against these companies for making drugs that kill and maim, the standard defense is: “Don’t blame us. The FDA approved our medicine as safe and effective. We’re off the hook. We’ve discharged our responsibility.”

Really? Who created the drug in the first place? Who did the clinical trials? Who sells the drug?

There’s an either-or situation here. It needs to be exposed. It goes this way: Either the pharmaceutical company or the FDA is responsible for people dying. You can’t accuse both. Pick one.

That’s a fool’s game. Both entities are responsible; the company that created the drug and the FDA who approved it and certified it as safe and effective. (And the medical journals that published the crooked studies of clinical trials are also responsible.)

The FDA seal of approval doesn’t automatically exonerate the company. “Well, the government said our company’s drug was fine.” So what? Since when does the government have the last word? Would you say the US military-industrial complex is solely the responsibility of the government, and the defense contractors play no role in launching endless wars? That would be naïve to the extreme.

As my readers know, because I’ve cited the key review dozens of times, pharmaceutical drugs kill 106,000 Americans every year. That’s a conservative mainstream estimate. (See Dr. Barbara Starfield, Journal of the American Medical Association, July 26, 2000, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?”)

All those drugs are approved as safe and effective by the FDA. They’re also created, developed, tested, and sold by drug companies. Anyone with a shred of understanding of RESPONSIBILITY would correctly point to the FDA AND the drug companies. (And medical journals.)

Therefore, a company arguing in court that they’re off the hook for killing people with their drugs, because the FDA approved them, is evading responsibility and trying to shift it to the government. And an honest judge and a reasonably intelligent jury would recognize that in a minute.

From the drug company’s point of view, there is a game going on. The company is doing whatever it can to please and satisfy the FDA, and if it can, then it can walk away without shouldering blame.

Obscuring one’s own responsibility is one of the major industries in any nation you care to examine. The numbers of people involved, the amount of money, the time, energy—this is a field of endeavor that expands every year.

A simple law would go a long way toward righting the ship: “A government certification of a product does not exempt the creator, developer, and seller of the product from facing legal action in criminal and civil court.”

From the street thug, to the highest corporate boardroom, to professional academic fabricators, the theme is the same: “It wasn’t me.”

Oh yes it was. And is.

Let’s break down the word-origin of “responsible.” “Respond” comes from the Latin. “Re”=“again.” “Spondere”=“to pledge.” This construction eventually morphed into: pledging again for one’s actions, standing behind one’s actions, re-affirming one’s actions. And finally, “responsible” also means “legally accountable.”

—As opposed to attributing the cause of one’s action to someone else.

“I defend my actions by claiming: ‘it wasn’t me’, someone else was in charge, someone else decided my actions were correct.”

No. Not even close.

Of course, the US Dept. of Justice isn’t interested in any of these matters. If they were, they would be arresting drug company executives and researchers, FDA executives and drug-reviewers, and medical-journal editors who permit the publication of obviously fake studies of new drugs.

Understand: When you have medical drugs killing 106,000 Americans a year, this necessarily implies that published studies of clinical trials of those drugs—studies that praise those drugs as safe and effective—are a rank fraud.

Medical journals, the FDA, drug companies (and doctors)—a club. And each member of the club is responsible. Accountable. Culpable.

The next time a doctor, or some “science blogger” who loves mainstream published studies, sounds off about “real science,” show them this piece. And if they say that Dr. Marcia Angell is just one medical-journal editor, point them to the following:

Richard Horton (another pro’s pro), editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”:

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…

“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…”

Two famous editors (Angell and Horton) of two of the most prestigious medical journals in the world torpedo their own corrupt practices.

And if that isn’t enough to put a dent in some potato-head, conventional, medical devotee, then just keep going with this, by the same Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet (from the same piece I just quoted:

Horton makes reference to a recent symposium he attended at the Wellcome Trust in London. The subject of the meeting was the reliability of published biomedical research. His following quote carries additional force because he and other attendees were told to obey Chatham House rules—meaning no one would reveal who made any given comment during the conference.

Horton: “‘A lot of what is published is incorrect.’ I’m not allowed to say who made this remark [at the conference] because we were asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take photographs of slides. Those who worked for government agencies pleaded that their comments especially remain unquoted, since the forthcoming UK election meant they were living in ‘purdah’—a chilling state where severe restrictions on freedom of speech are placed on anyone on the government’s payroll. Why the paranoid concern for secrecy and non-attribution? Because this symposium—on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research, held at the Wellcome Trust in London last week—touched on one of the most sensitive issues in science today: the idea that something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations [biomedical science]”.

Conventional science bloggers, take notice. You’re working in a field where studies supporting the general consensus are tainted and stained.

Starting sentences with “the FDA approves” or “the CDC confirms” or “a study published in The New England Journal established” isn’t a ticket to the truth. Far from it.

You’re wading in a stench-ridden swamp, and you don’t know it; or you do know it and you don’t care, because you want to be part of the club; or someone is paying you to make absurd assertions. One way or another, you’re doomed if you follow the party line.

This is a much different landscape than you think it is. It’s a wholesale fabrication of what looks, sounds, smells, tastes, and feels like truth. But it isn’t. It’s a lying cartoon.

And it has vicious consequences for the health of the millions of people.

Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

19 comments on “Famous medical-journal editor torpedoes medical journal

  1. Eliza Ayres says:

    Reblogged this on Blue Dragon Journal and commented:
    If responsibility is not taken, there is a balance in the energies that will come due. Universal law applies to all.

    • Bruce says:

      Ms. Ayres is correct. Corrupt order-followers are guilty of whatever their level of complicity. I would argue additionally that we ourselves are also culpable in that we elect cowardly, self-aggrandizing psychopaths to office, who in turn appoint corrupt monopoly representatives to supposedly regulate their own transnational monopolies. We the people elect human garbage, in turn appointing more trash to represent special interests instead of citizens – and all on confiscated taxpayer dollars no less. Politicians won’t change anything if we don’t change ourselves.

  2. Tim says:

    “Before you count Dr. Angell as a hero, consider this: why didn’t she blow the whistle loud and clear while she was editing The New England Journal?”

    When starting out in the field, it isn’t obvious that the literature is full of junk. It takes time for the realization to dawn that there is something seriously wrong. How long does it take? Several years. Some people never get it.

    • From Quebec says:

      You are right Tim.

      Just like with the Fake news media, it takes a while to realize that if you want real news, you have to go to the alternative media.

      Same thing with medicine, it takes a while before people switch to Alternative medicine that is the real cure and the safe thing to do.

      Infowars.com. has great products that work very well, I have recommended them to many friends with health problems and they were all incredibly satisfied with the results.

  3. Greg C. says:

    “It’s a lying cartoon.”

    For many hospitals, the lie is part of their name: “Saint” such and such. Stolen halos, part of the deception.

  4. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    If Climategate emails had not surfaced in Nov 2009, I would never have realized that Nobel Prizes are awarded to disguise pseudo-science as “consensus science.”

    Thanks to Climategate in 2009, we noticed the grave implications for science when Chadwick:

    1. Reported experimental evidence in 1932 for the neutron as an “electron-proton pair in close combination, and

    2. Reversed his opinion in his 1935 Nobel Lecture because the QM theory would NOT ALLOW the neutron to be an “electron-proton pair in close combination.”

    That 1935 error has isolated all humanity from reality, truth, God for the past eighty-two years:


  5. Oliver K. Manuel says:

    It is encouraging that the editor of a major journal is finally speaking out.

  6. Joseph says:

    Great article, as always. Could you please post the links to those articles by Angell and Horton you mentioned? Thanks!

  7. elliottjab says:

    More chilling medical info…

  8. Those 106,000 are only those who die in hospital. As most drugs are prescribed to out-patients the real number will be a LOT higher. And that’s only drugs as a direct cause of death. Most drugs kill slowly, so the actual number of people who die from prescription medication is likely 5-10 million, EVERY YEAR. And that’s only Americans. Drugs are weapons of mass destruction.

  9. Oliver Manuel says:

    Over my career, the arrogance and power of editors to control science has increased dramatically.

    Forty years ago in 1977 the editor of Science, Philip Ableson, published an open debate on the relative merits of local element synthesis vs super-heavy element fission in explaining the Strange xenon, extinct super-heavy elements, and the solar neutrino puzzle.”


    Forty years ago, an editor of Nature allowed publication of a paper by Dr. Peter Toth, Is the Sun a pulsar?”


    And thirty-four years ago another Nature editor, Dr. John Maddox, published an editorial by P. K. Swart on The demise of established dogmas on the formation of the Solar System” Nature 303, 26 May 1983, pp. 286-286: http://tallbloke.files.wordpress.com/2010/0

    However the current editor of Nature, Dr. Philip Campbell, refused to publish, or to even send out for review, our reply to the 1977 article, Yes, the Sun is a pulsar.”

  10. betty says:

    On another blog I was reading about so many Americans being debt slaves, I don’t know about people’s debt, but I can see the pain and exceptance on their faces as they try to deal with horrific healthcare they’ve been hoodwinked into. Healthcare has become so huge just about everyone works, or has family in the system. I’m very blessed to be 61 and old enough to remember when healthcare was small, and most people were healthy. I haven’t been to a doctor more times than i can count on one hand except for having two children. I never took my kids to doctors either there was no need they were healthy and strong. Of course we’ve had health problems but I solve them with the proper nutrients and energy. People have given up the right to a healthy body, they have given the power of that over to People who know nothing about how to heal and regrow the body. It’s sad. It not going to change until people take back their power. There has been a lot of light she’d on this subject. People can figure it out. We better figure out how in the world we are going to pay for and manage all the destruction that has gone on. The medical battlefield is strewn with human bodies. They are everywhere.

  11. Dan Germouse says:

    Fluoride is the most commonly taken drug in the US, and the claim that taking it in water is “safe and effective” the most obvious example of fraud. Fluoride is highly toxic and a cumulative poison, like lead, arsenic, and mercury. I have asked many forced-fluoridation fanatics to tell me how much accumulated fluoride in the body they think is safe. So far not a single one of them has been able to answer the question. It is unlikely to just be a coincidence that the US, Australia, and Ireland, which have had high rates of forced-fluoridation for decades, also have high rates of joint problems, and poor health outcomes in general.

  12. Rick Sharp says:

    > Don’t blame us. The FDA approved our medicine as
    > safe and effective. We’re off the hook. We’ve
    > discharged our responsibility.

    You have to understand that the only service the state sells to its subordinates is protection. To protect one citizen or entity against another. – It is black mailing business or “protection” business.

    By bribing an authority is just buying the protection against the law. – Discharge out of responsibility.

    – Consider for example the simple case of getting the Building permit. It is nothing more that an insurance against your neighbors not to have to tear down your building or pay compensation if it causes trouble.

  13. will iam says:

    Its called justifiable lies……

    WE lie to ourselves, then WE lie to the OTHERS
    Because there are so many of US there is a symphony of DUNDERHEADS
    All in COLLECTIVE agreement of manufactured BULLSHIT!

  14. billy says:

    Just my two bits worth, but before we start burning heretics I suggest a careful re-reading of “The emperor’s new clothes”, followed by a review of Max Weber’s work on organizational behavior.

    It is our systems of social/professional organization that direct our public behavior as much as our “flawed character” that is the culprit. IMO until we understand why good people do horrible things, from burning witches to approving toxic meds to sanctioning phony wars, we all share some of the blame.

    In a “democratic” world run by statistical modeling, individual exceptions are not going to yield much progress. Unless and until we understand why “the Emperor’s new clothes” appear so chic to so many we are unlikely to advance as a species.

  15. missycaulk says:

    Conventional science bloggers, take notice. You’re working in a field where studies supporting the general consensus are tainted and stained.

  16. Collon says:

    To me, that boring old cliche: “follow the money” says it all. How many “scientists” are out there making their living chasing climate change, vaccinations, drugs, cures etc? Not much money in truth … gotta make it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *