THE MEDICAL MAFIA

Allopathy Cartels
"They are running a monopoly and they will lie, cheat and steal to keep it that way." Dr Eva Snead
The entity that runs Allopathy. Aka The Drug Trust. Known as IG Farben in Germany
http://www.naturalnews.com/024534.html which merged with Rockefeller (the creator of Allopathy
Inc) before the war. Only the top people in Allopathy know the whole truth on Allopathic medicine,
and covert-vaccine agendas. Most visible entity would be the AMA whose antics over the years make
Pol Pot look like a choir boy (he, incidentally, was funded by the CIA). They run this huge extortion
scheme known as the DISEASE PROTECTION RACKET. They can run their mind control through
suppressing non-Allopathic medicine and doctors through corrupt state laws and using state security,
while they run their propaganda through their controlled media and government. Most of the
propaganda is the creation of fear of disease to sell vaccination and their cancer 'medicine.'.
Best expose in book form is The Medical Mafia by Guylaine Lanctot, M.D, Naked Empress by
Hans Ruesch & The Drug Story by Morris Beale. How the Drug Trust took over medicine can be read
in Murder By Injection by Eustace Mullins. How they suppressed Homeopathy can be read in Divided
Legacy Vol 3: by Harris L. Coulter.
Suppressed or ignored dozens of disease cures in cancer, AIDS, Alzheimer's, cot-death, infections,
arthritis, heart disease etc, as this Tyrant runs on Power & money fuelled by fear of disease, propaganda
& it's covert monopoly. Ego denial helps keep her in power. This Empress when naked is Satanic
(vaccination: 666) & run by psychopaths. One of the main money sources for the Elite, hence its
power. Just like most soldiers have no idea about the real reasons for wars like Iraq, most medical
workers have no idea Allopathy is run purely for profit, and is out to harm and kill--- most of these
people are not ready to be unplugged and many are so hopelessly dependent on the system, they will
fight to protect it.1 . To see its true nature exposed see one of its main rackets--Cancer.]

"The medical cartel, at the highest level, is not out to help people, it is out to harm them, to weaken
them. To kill them. At one point in my career, I had a long conversation with a man who occupied a
high government position in an African nation. He told me that he was well aware of this. He told me
that WHO is a front for these depopulation interests."--Jon Rappoport interview
"The medical monopoly or medical trust, euphemistically called the American Medical Association, is
not merely the meanest monopoly ever organized, but the most arrogant, dangerous and despotic
organisation which ever managed a free people in this or any other age. Any and all methods of healing
the sick by means of safe, simple and natural remedies are sure to be assailed and denounced by the
arrogant leaders of the AMA doctors' trust as fakes, frauds and humbugs. Every practitioner of the
healing art who does not ally himself with the medical trust is denounced as a 'dangerous quack' and
impostor by the predatory trust doctors. Every sanitarian who attempts to restore the sick to a state of
health by natural means without resort to the knife or poisonous drugs, disease imparting serums,
deadly toxins or vaccines, is at once pounced upon by these medical tyrants and fanatics, bitterly
denounced, vilified and persecuted to the fullest extent"---J.W Hodge, M.D
A large part of this medical disaster that the United States currently experiences is due to the way our
medical community is organized. Basically it is not organized to heal and to cure disease; the medical
community, particularly at its upper levels, is a commercial venture organized to make money for its
practitioners. The Cardiac surgeon, for example, does nothing whatsoever to cure cardiac disease.
Three to five percent of the heart surgery patients die on the operating table. Cardiac surgery provides
no better three year survival rate than no treatment at all. A Harvard survival study of 200,000 patients
revealed that the long term survival rate of patients subjected to surgery was no better than the survival
rate of those that had no surgery. GANGSTERS IN MEDICINE By Thomas Smith

"1935 The Pellagra Incident. After millions of individuals die from Pellagra over a span of two
decades, the U.S. Public Health Service finally acts to stem the disease. The director of the agency
admits it had known for at least 20 years that Pellagra is caused by a niacin deficiency but failed to act
since most of the deaths occured within poverty-striken black population”
http://www.whale.to/a/medical_mafia.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=theme&themeId=24

French judges probe pharmaceutical firms over vaccinations:

Investigation for manslaughter
Fri Feb 1, 2008 3:32am EST PARIS, Jan 31 (Reuters) - French authorities have opened a formal
investigation into two managers from drugs groups GlaxoSmithKline (GSK.L: Quote, Profile,
Research) and Sanofi Pasteur over a vaccination campaign in the 1990s, a judicial source said late on
Thursday.
Judge Marie-Odile Bertella-Geffroy also opened an investigation for manslaughter against Sanofi
Pasteur MSD, a joint venture between Sanofi Aventis (SASY.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) and Merck
(MRK.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the same source said.
The investigations follow allegations that the companies failed to fully disclose side effects from an
anti-hepatitis B drug used in a vaccination campaign between 1994 and 1998.
There was no immediate comment from the companies or the two managers involved.
From 1994 to 1998, almost two thirds of the French population and almost all newborn babies were
vaccinated against hepatitis B, but the campaign was suspended after concerns arose about possible
secondary effects from the treatments.
Some 30 plaintiffs have launched a civil action in the case, including the families of five people who
died after vaccination.

(Reporting by Thierry Leveque; Writing by James Mackenzie; Editing by David Holmes)

© Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.

Internal Memo Confirms Big Giveaways In

White House Deal With Big Pharma
by Ryan Grim

A memo obtained by the Huffington Post confirms that the White House and the pharmaceutical lobby
secretly agreed to precisely the sort of wide-ranging deal that both parties have been denying over the
past week.
The memo, which according to a knowledgeable health care lobbyist was prepared by a person directly
involved in the negotiations, lists exactly what the White House gave up, and what it got in return.
It says the White House agreed to oppose any congressional efforts to use the government's leverage to
bargain for lower drug prices or import drugs from Canada -- and also agreed not to pursue Medicare
rebates or shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would cost Big Pharma
billions in reduced reimbursements.
In exchange, the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) agreed to cut
$80 billion in projected costs to taxpayers and senior citizens over ten years. Or, as the memo says:
"Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion."

Representatives from both the White House and PhRMA, shown the outline, adamantly denied that it
reflected reality. PhRMA senior vice president Ken Johnson said that the outline "is simply not
accurate." "This memo isn't accurate and does not reflect the agreement with the drug companies," said
White House spokesman Reid Cherlin.
Stories in the Los Angeles Times and the New York Times last week indicated that the administration
was confirming that such a deal had been made.
Critics on Capitol Hill and online responded with outrage at the reports that Obama had gone behind
their backs and sold the reform movement short. Furthermore, the deal seemed to be a betrayal of
several promises made by then-Sen. Obama during the presidential campaign, among them that he
would use the power of government to drive down the costs of drugs to Medicare and that negotiations
would be conducted in the open.
And over the past several days, both the White House and PhRMA have offered a series of sometimes
conflicting accounts of what happened in an attempt to walk back the story.
The White House meeting took place on July 7th, as first reported that evening in the Wall Street
Journal. Also on the same day, a health care lobbyist following the talks was provided the outline of the
deal by a person inside the negotiations. That outline had been floating around K Street before being
obtained by the Huffington Post. In order to learn more about its origin, HuffPost agreed not to reveal
the name of the lobbyist who originally received it.
"That is the PhRMA deal," said the lobbyist of the outline. He then clarified, "It was the PhRMA deal."
The deal, as outlined in the memo:
 Commitment of up to $80 billion, but not more than $80 billion.

1. Agree to increase of Medicaid rebate from 15.1 - 23.1% ($34 billion)

2. Agree to get FOBs done (but no agreement on details -- express disagreement on data
exclusivity which both sides say does not affect the score of the legislation.) ($9 billion)

3. Sell drugs to patients in the donut hole at 50% discount ($25 billion)
This totals $68 billion

4. Companies will be assessed a tax or fee that will score at $12 billion. There was no
agreement as to how or on what this tax/fee will be based.

Total: $80 billion

In exchange for these items, the White House agreed to:

1. Oppose importation

2. Oppose rebates in Medicare Part D

3. Oppose repeal of non-interference

4. Oppose opening Medicare Part B

"Non-interference" is the industry term for the status quo, in which government-driven price
negotiations are barred. In other words, the government is "interfering" in the market if it negotiates
lower prices. The ban on negotiating was led through Congress in 2003 by then-Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-
La.), who is now the head of PhRMA.
The rebates reference is to Medicare overpayments Big Pharma managed to wrangle from the
Republican Congress that Democrats are trying to recoup. The House bill would require Big Pharma to
return some of that money. The rebate proposal would save $63 billion over ten years, according to the
Congressional Budget Office. The White House, given the chance, declined to tell the Wall Street
Journal for a July 17th article that it supported the effort to pursue the rebates.
The Medicare Part B item refers to "infusion drugs," which can be administered at home. If they fall
under Part B, Big Pharma gets paid more than under Part D. The agreement would leave infusion drugs
in Part B.
In the section on Big Pharma's concessions, "FOBs" refers to follow-on biological drugs. Democrats
have pushed to make it easier to allow generic drug makers to produce cheaper versions of such drugs,
an effort Big Pharma has resisted. The Senate health committee bill gives drug makers 12 years of
market exclusivity, five more than the White House proposed.
PhRMA's Johnson cast doubts on the provenance of the outline. "The memo, as described, is simply
not accurate," he said in a statement. "Anyone could have written it. Unless it comes from our board of
directors, it's not worth the paper it's written on. Clearly, someone is trying to short circuit our efforts to
try and make health care reform a reality this year. That's not going to happen. Too much is at stake for
both patients and the U.S. economy. Our new ads supporting health care reform are starting this week,
and we are redoubling our efforts to drive awareness of why this issue is so important to America's
future."
Johnson added that "no outside lobbyists -- not a single one -- were ever involved in our discussions
with the Senate Finance Committee or the White House so someone is blowing smoke."
But the lobbyist who was given the outline defended its authenticity. And although the White House
now says that drug price negotiations and reimportation were not actually discussed in the talks with
PhRMA, the lobbyist said: "Well, that's bull -- that's baloney. That was part of the deal, for them not to
push that."
The new uncertainty surrounding the deal comes after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has
repeatedly said that her chamber is not bound by any agreement it is not a party to. On July 8th, the day
after the Journal reported some elements of the deal, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman
Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said in a public speech that his committee would not be tied down by the
agreement.
Before recess, he followed through. His committee passed a bill that allowed for re-importation and
drug-price negotiations.
In the Senate, Democrats Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and Byron Dorgan (N.D.) pressed White House
officials at a closed-door meeting last week, asking whether the White House had tied the Senate's
hands.
The health care lobbyist said that what deal still exists is uncertain, as a result of House pressure. "Now
the White House is backing away from it, as you know, because of pressure from the House, because
the House was not a party to the deal," he said. "The Speaker put enormous pressure on the White
House, [saying], 'We weren't a party to it and we reserve the right to do whatever we want.' And which
they did in the House Energy and Commerce Committee bill, which led the White House to say, 'Well,
maybe it's not cast in concrete.'"
Obama is walking a tightrope here. He wants to keep PhRMA from opposing the bill, and benefits by
having its support, which now includes a $150 million advertising campaign. That's a fortune in politics
-- more than Republican presidential candidate John McCain spent on advertising during his entire
campaign -- but it's loose change in the pharmaceutical business.
Opponents of the deal with PhRMA hope that Obama is playing a multilayered game, making a deal in
order to keep the drug makers in his camp for now, but planning to double-cross them in the end if he
needs to in order to pass his signature initiative.
Big Pharma, however, is still comfortable. "As far as the pharmaceutical industry, PhRMA and its
member companies, yes, they say a deal is a deal. We'll see what happens," said the health care
lobbyist.

The lawlessness of the FDA, Big Pharma immunity, and crimes

against humanity
June 30, 2006 is a day that will be long remembered as a dark milestone in the history of FDA and its
campaign against health consumers. On June 30, an FDA "Final Rule" goes into effect, establishing a
regulatory power grab of such scale and scope that it attempts to bypass all laws, the will of Congress
and fundamental protections for consumers. This "Final Rule," which may as well be called a "Final
Solution" for drug consumers, claims that consumers can no longer sue drug companies for the harm
caused by any FDA-approved drug, even if the drug's manufacturer intentionally misled the FDA by
hiding or fabricating clinical trial data. http://www.naturalnews.com/019497.html
Merck Created Hit List to "Destroy," "Neutralize" or "Discredit" Dissenting
Doctors

Merck made a “hit list” of doctors who criticized Vioxx, according to testimony in a Vioxx class action
case in Australia. The list, emailed between Merck employees, contained doctors’ names with the labels
“neutralise,” “neutralised” or “discredit” next to them.
According to The Australian, Merck emails from 1999 showed company execs complaining about
doctors who disliked using Vioxx. One email said:

We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live …
http://industry.bnet.com/pharma/10001990/merck-created-hit-list-to-destroy-neutralize-or-discredit-
dissenting-doctors/

Dr. John Rengen Virapen worked 35 years for Eli Lilly & Co as an executive. He now speaks out on
the many crimes “Big Pharma” was and is responsible for and he himself also participated in.
Unfortunately, many of its crimes go passed public awareness as it enjoys the unethical protection from
its big allies, the mainstream media, the FDA and governments.
The first three minutes are in German, then it is in English.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3038327885080044854
http://blogs.healthfreedomalliance.org/blog/category/big-pharma/