Minutus

I found an article on natural news with some numbers but most are based on a study from 2003. it speaks to the money the US spends on terrorism vs, health care and deaths resulting from each. but it does give some pretty scary numbers, especially for the deaths from OTC drugs that people assume completely harmless. i plucked a few quotes here and the link to the full story follows
Vicki

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes

According to the study led by Null, which involved a painstaking review of thousands of medical records, the United States spends $282 billion annually on deaths due to medical mistakes, or iatrogenic deaths

That means that prescription drugs in this country are at least 16,400 percent deadlier than terrorism. Again, those are the conservative numbers. A more realistic number, which would include deaths from over-the-counter drugs, makes drug consumption 32,000 percent deadlier than terrorism. But the scope of "Death by Medicine" is even wider. Conventional medicine, including unnecessary surgeries, bedsores and medical errors, is 104,700 percent deadlier than terrorism. Yet, our government's attention and money is not put into reforming health care.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html#ixzz2ZJMastZK
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: tamarque
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
John
It was around 1998 I think that the JAMA published the article stating 100,000 deaths annually
in American hospitals due to legally prescribed allopathic treatment.
It is many years since that article and that number is still used to describe the problem
However, people like Mercola have analyzed the situation and have come up with 1-2 million
deaths/year from allopathic ‘care.’ There reasoning is as follows:
1. These are only deaths that have been openly attributed to the care given. They do not
examine the many deaths attributed to cancer and heart disease or many other faux pas
of the medical industry.
2. Deaths caused by treatment in private institutions or outside of hospitals are not included in
these numbers. Doctors are not required to report adverse effects of any sort. It is a voluntary
system that most doctors ignore.
I saw some numbers from the UK this past year. They were reported at a lower number but somewhere
in the 10’s of thousands
Further, I think it reasonable to look at all the cancer deaths, heart disease, growing alzheimer and
Parkinson diseases and attribute them to the medical industry which refuses to link rotten nutrition
to all kinds of diseases and deaths. The medical industry’s active discouragement of looking to
nutrition is as much part of the medical industry treatment protocol as the toxic drugs they push.
It is failure numbers like this that make the medical industry hungry to prove harm from homeopathy, nutrition
and other holistic protocols.
t
From: John Harvey
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:49 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
Roger, your 50 million… you're not speaking globally here, are you. This figure is only for your country? You're in the U.S., I gather? I don't suppose you have a figure for global allopathic deaths and how it was calculated?
John
________________________________

yes, Gary Null—his work is phenomenal. He has several CDs out on his work
and you may even find his testimony to the NYS legislature in 2011?? on line.
The book you mention, Death by Medicine is one that has become well known.
t
From: vicki h
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 10:05 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US

I found an article on natural news with some numbers but most are based on a study from 2003. it speaks to the money the US spends on terrorism vs, health care and deaths resulting from each. but it does give some pretty scary numbers, especially for the deaths from OTC drugs that people assume completely harmless. i plucked a few quotes here and the link to the full story follows
Vicki

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes

According to the study led by Null, which involved a painstaking review of thousands of medical records, the United States spends $282 billion annually on deaths due to medical mistakes, or iatrogenic deaths

That means that prescription drugs in this country are at least 16,400 percent deadlier than terrorism. Again, those are the conservative numbers. A more realistic number, which would include deaths from over-the-counter drugs, makes drug consumption 32,000 percent deadlier than terrorism. But the scope of "Death by Medicine" is even wider. Conventional medicine, including unnecessary surgeries, bedsores and medical errors, is 104,700 percent deadlier than terrorism. Yet, our government's attention and money is not put into reforming health care.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html#ixzz2ZJMastZK

Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter

"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy

________________________________

From: tamarque
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir

John
It was around 1998 I think that the JAMA published the article stating 100,000 deaths annually
in American hospitals due to legally prescribed allopathic treatment.
It is many years since that article and that number is still used to describe the problem
However, people like Mercola have analyzed the situation and have come up with 1-2 million
deaths/year from allopathic ‘care.’ There reasoning is as follows:
1. These are only deaths that have been openly attributed to the care given. They do not
examine the many deaths attributed to cancer and heart disease or many other faux pas
of the medical industry.
2. Deaths caused by treatment in private institutions or outside of hospitals are not included in
these numbers. Doctors are not required to report adverse effects of any sort. It is a voluntary
system that most doctors ignore.
I saw some numbers from the UK this past year. They were reported at a lower number but somewhere
in the 10’s of thousands
Further, I think it reasonable to look at all the cancer deaths, heart disease, growing alzheimer and
Parkinson diseases and attribute them to the medical industry which refuses to link rotten nutrition
to all kinds of diseases and deaths. The medical industry’s active discouragement of looking to
nutrition is as much part of the medical industry treatment protocol as the toxic drugs they push.
It is failure numbers like this that make the medical industry hungry to prove harm from homeopathy, nutrition
and other holistic protocols.
t
From: John Harvey
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:49 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
Roger, your 50 million… you're not speaking globally here, are you. This figure is only for your country? You're in the U.S., I gather? I don't suppose you have a figure for global allopathic deaths and how it was calculated?
John
________________________________

Just a communications comment. When you get percentages so high, it is confusing and I worry if you mean 16,400% which equals 175 times more. Two times more would be 100% more. I never use percentages that high; I use the "times more". A less confusing way of putting it would be "we had 3000 deaths from terrorism and 700,000 deaths (numbers are for illustration purposes) from the medical profession". That way no one gets confused.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: vickih_fla@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 07:05:23 -0700
Subject: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
I found an article on natural news with some numbers but most are based on a study from 2003. it speaks to the money the US spends on terrorism vs, health care and deaths resulting from each. but it does give some pretty scary numbers, especially for the deaths from OTC drugs that people assume completely harmless. i plucked a few quotes here and the link to the full story follows
Vicki

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes

According to the study led by Null, which involved a painstaking review of thousands of medical records, the United States spends $282 billion annually on deaths due to medical mistakes, or iatrogenic deaths

That means that prescription drugs in this country are at least 16,400 percent deadlier than terrorism. Again, those are the conservative numbers. A more realistic number, which would include deaths from over-the-counter drugs, makes drug consumption 32,000 percent deadlier than terrorism. But the scope of "Death by Medicine" is even wider. Conventional medicine, including unnecessary surgeries, bedsores and medical errors, is 104,700 percent deadlier than terrorism. Yet, our government's attention and money is not put into reforming health care.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html#ixzz2ZJMastZK
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: tamarque
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
John
It was around 1998 I think that the JAMA published the article stating 100,000 deaths annually
in American hospitals due to legally prescribed allopathic treatment.
It is many years since that article and that number is still used to describe the problem
However, people like Mercola have analyzed the situation and have come up with 1-2 million
deaths/year from allopathic ‘care.’ There reasoning is as follows:
1. These are only deaths that have been openly attributed to the care given. They do not
examine the many deaths attributed to cancer and heart disease or many other faux pas
of the medical industry.
2. Deaths caused by treatment in private institutions or outside of hospitals are not included in
these numbers. Doctors are not required to report adverse effects of any sort. It is a voluntary
system that most doctors ignore.
I saw some numbers from the UK this past year. They were reported at a lower number but somewhere
in the 10’s of thousands
Further, I think it reasonable to look at all the cancer deaths, heart disease, growing alzheimer and
Parkinson diseases and attribute them to the medical industry which refuses to link rotten nutrition
to all kinds of diseases and deaths. The medical industry’s active discouragement of looking to
nutrition is as much part of the medical industry treatment protocol as the toxic drugs they push.
It is failure numbers like this that make the medical industry hungry to prove harm from homeopathy, nutrition
and other holistic protocols.
t
From: John Harvey
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:49 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
Roger, your 50 million… you're not speaking globally here, are you. This figure is only for your country? You're in the U.S., I gather? I don't suppose you have a figure for global allopathic deaths and how it was calculated?
John
________________________________

I confess that I get all worked up over terrorism. But the integral of my fretting over time is much greater for the medical so-called profession. I spend much more time hating their guts than terrorists, but I just can't get out of my mind those living people falling from the WTC.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: vickih_fla@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 07:05:23 -0700
Subject: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
I found an article on natural news with some numbers but most are based on a study from 2003. it speaks to the money the US spends on terrorism vs, health care and deaths resulting from each. but it does give some pretty scary numbers, especially for the deaths from OTC drugs that people assume completely harmless. i plucked a few quotes here and the link to the full story follows
Vicki

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes

According to the study led by Null, which involved a painstaking review of thousands of medical records, the United States spends $282 billion annually on deaths due to medical mistakes, or iatrogenic deaths

That means that prescription drugs in this country are at least 16,400 percent deadlier than terrorism. Again, those are the conservative numbers. A more realistic number, which would include deaths from over-the-counter drugs, makes drug consumption 32,000 percent deadlier than terrorism. But the scope of "Death by Medicine" is even wider. Conventional medicine, including unnecessary surgeries, bedsores and medical errors, is 104,700 percent deadlier than terrorism. Yet, our government's attention and money is not put into reforming health care.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html#ixzz2ZJMastZK
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: tamarque
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
John
It was around 1998 I think that the JAMA published the article stating 100,000 deaths annually
in American hospitals due to legally prescribed allopathic treatment.
It is many years since that article and that number is still used to describe the problem
However, people like Mercola have analyzed the situation and have come up with 1-2 million
deaths/year from allopathic ‘care.’ There reasoning is as follows:
1. These are only deaths that have been openly attributed to the care given. They do not
examine the many deaths attributed to cancer and heart disease or many other faux pas
of the medical industry.
2. Deaths caused by treatment in private institutions or outside of hospitals are not included in
these numbers. Doctors are not required to report adverse effects of any sort. It is a voluntary
system that most doctors ignore.
I saw some numbers from the UK this past year. They were reported at a lower number but somewhere
in the 10’s of thousands
Further, I think it reasonable to look at all the cancer deaths, heart disease, growing alzheimer and
Parkinson diseases and attribute them to the medical industry which refuses to link rotten nutrition
to all kinds of diseases and deaths. The medical industry’s active discouragement of looking to
nutrition is as much part of the medical industry treatment protocol as the toxic drugs they push.
It is failure numbers like this that make the medical industry hungry to prove harm from homeopathy, nutrition
and other holistic protocols.
t
From: John Harvey
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:49 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
Roger, your 50 million… you're not speaking globally here, are you. This figure is only for your country? You're in the U.S., I gather? I don't suppose you have a figure for global allopathic deaths and how it was calculated?
John
________________________________

i did not write the article or the study, don't shoot the messenger.
THEY used it for dramatic effect. i understand your point about fluffery but the quotes are posted "after" my name. maybe you should email natural news about your concerns
i was just trying to give some numbers on allopahic deaths in US since that is where the conversation was trending.
vicki
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: Roger B
To: "Homeopathy minutus@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 10:27 AM
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
Just a communications comment. When you get percentages so high, it is confusing and I worry if you mean 16,400% which equals 175 times more. Two times more would be 100% more. I never use percentages that high; I use the "times more". A less confusing way of putting it would be "we had 3000 deaths from terrorism and 700,000 deaths (numbers are for illustration purposes) from the medical profession". That way no one gets confused.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: vickih_fla@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 07:05:23 -0700
Subject: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
I found an article on natural news with some numbers but most are based on a study from 2003. it speaks to the money the US spends on terrorism vs, health care and deaths resulting from each. but it does give some pretty scary numbers, especially for the deaths from OTC drugs that people assume completely harmless. i plucked a few quotes here and the link to the full story follows
Vicki

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes

According to the study led by Null, which involved a painstaking review of thousands of medical records, the United States spends $282 billion annually on deaths due to medical mistakes, or iatrogenic deaths

That means that prescription drugs in this country are at least 16,400 percent deadlier than terrorism. Again, those are the conservative numbers. A more realistic number, which would include deaths from over-the-counter drugs, makes drug consumption 32,000 percent deadlier than terrorism. But the scope of "Death by Medicine" is even wider. Conventional medicine, including unnecessary surgeries, bedsores and medical errors, is 104,700 percent deadlier than terrorism. Yet, our government's attention and money is not put into reforming health care.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html#ixzz2ZJMastZK
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: tamarque
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
John
It was around 1998 I think that the JAMA published the article stating 100,000 deaths annually
in American hospitals due to legally prescribed allopathic treatment.
It is many years since that article and that number is still used to describe the problem
However, people like Mercola have analyzed the situation and have come up with 1-2 million
deaths/year from allopathic ‘care.’ There reasoning is as follows:
1. These are only deaths that have been openly attributed to the care given. They do not
examine the many deaths attributed to cancer and heart disease or many other faux pas
of the medical industry.
2. Deaths caused by treatment in private institutions or outside of hospitals are not included in
these numbers. Doctors are not required to report adverse effects of any sort. It is a voluntary
system that most doctors ignore.
I saw some numbers from the UK this past year. They were reported at a lower number but somewhere
in the 10’s of thousands
Further, I think it reasonable to look at all the cancer deaths, heart disease, growing alzheimer and
Parkinson diseases and attribute them to the medical industry which refuses to link rotten nutrition
to all kinds of diseases and deaths. The medical industry’s active discouragement of looking to
nutrition is as much part of the medical industry treatment protocol as the toxic drugs they push.
It is failure numbers like this that make the medical industry hungry to prove harm from homeopathy, nutrition
and other holistic protocols.
t
From: John Harvey
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:49 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
Roger, your 50 million… you're not speaking globally here, are you. This figure is only for your country? You're in the U.S., I gather? I don't suppose you have a figure for global allopathic deaths and how it was calculated?
John
________________________________

I see that Null et al.'s paper has already been mentioned.

Roger, your figures here illustrate perfectly why it's actually a better idea to avoid the construction "so-many times more" unless you really understand it. Two times more is not in fact 100% more; it is 200% more. The common American practice of exaggerating numbers for marketing effect has led "two times as many" (i.e. 100% more) to be translated into "two times more" (i.e. three times as many, or 200% more), in the process unfortunately rendering the construction virtually useless in communication involving anybody in the U.S. Those in other countries tend to understand it, but the danger is always that the construction "X times more" either has come from a U.S. resident and actually means "X times as many" or may be misinterpreted by a U.S. resident as an expression of the U.S. exaggeration of "X times as many". For that reason, communication is clearest that avoids that construction altogether.

Easy clear alternatives include:

• "X times as many [or much],

• "X hundred percent times as many [or much]", and

• "[X minus one] hundred percent more".

The same consideration as applies to "X times more" applies to "X times deadlier than" and "X hundred percent deadlier than": was its deadliness really, say, 16,400 percent higher (i.e. 164 times higher, or 165 times as high), or was this an American numerical mistranslation of 16,400 percent times as high (i.e. 16,300 percent times higher)? You can't know without seeing the figures and working it out for yourself, and thus the declaration is useless in the first place.

I have in fact seen a report in which figures had undergone not one but two iterations of this exact mistake, resulting in percentages that, in perfectly good faith, the authors had ended up exaggerating by 200 percentage points. And there's nothing to stop reiteration of the mistake in every second paraphrasing of an earlier paraphrasing, resulting in a further phantom 100% each time. So it's not a trivial matter.

Cheers --

John
________________________________
--

.

"What is ironic here is that what is being held out as a justification for high regulation and compliance in the area of Complementary Medicines, Natural Products, Traditional Products, Supplements, Vitamins etc, is public safety and risk. Despite a diligent search of Coronial records and the literature, no instances have been found to demonstrate that in fact with these products in NZ there is any serious public health issue or risk to the public. The problem is clearly with prescription and other drugs and no demonstrable risk at all with these natural products… The Coronial and literature searches in so far as natural products etc are concerned and linkages to public safety and risk can be described legally as De minimis non curat lex. That is—of minimal risk importance. The law (regulations etc) does not and should not concern itself with trifles."
—D.W. Bain, Report to IM Health Trust: Complementary Medicines, Natural Products, Traditional Products, Supplements, Vitamins etc., Lamb, Bain & Laubscher, New Zealand, viewed Feb 20 2013, (emphasis added).

i couldn't have said it better myself, out of all the math classes i took, and it was quite a few, statistics and probabilities were my most hated. it wasn't real math, it was ways to manipulate numbers to say what you wanted them to say. studies always confuse things by the % more than % increase, Xtimes greater or more or less than. just give me the raw data. even a graph speaks volumes. how about the old faithful pie chart? any time a study comes out and all the websites have an article explaining what the study says, i just go read the study for myself. i don't want someones slanted opinion of the facts.
was it Humphrey Bogart who said it... just the facts mam????
vicki
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: John Harvey
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
I see that Null et al.'s paper has already been mentioned.

Roger, your figures here illustrate perfectly why it's actually a better idea to avoid the construction "so-many times more" unless you really understand it. Two times more is not in fact 100% more; it is 200% more. The common American practice of exaggerating numbers for marketing effect has led "two times as many" (i.e. 100% more) to be translated into "two times more" (i.e. three times as many, or 200% more), in the process unfortunately rendering the construction virtually useless in communication involving anybody in the U.S. Those in other countries tend to understand it, but the danger is always that the construction "X times more" either has come from a U.S. resident and actually means "X times as many" or may be misinterpreted by a U.S. resident as an expression of the U.S. exaggeration of "X times as many". For that reason, communication is clearest that avoids that construction altogether.

Easy clear alternatives include:

• "X times as many [or much],

• "X hundred percent times as many [or much]", and

• "[X minus one] hundred percent more".

The same consideration as applies to "X times more" applies to "X times deadlier than" and "X hundred percent deadlier than": was its deadliness really, say, 16,400 percent higher (i.e. 164 times higher, or 165 times as high), or was this an American numerical mistranslation of 16,400 percent times as high (i.e. 16,300 percent times higher)? You can't know without seeing the figures and working it out for yourself, and thus the declaration is useless in the first place.

I have in fact seen a report in which figures had undergone not one but two iterations of this exact mistake, resulting in percentages that, in perfectly good faith, the authors had ended up exaggerating by 200 percentage points. And there's nothing to stop reiteration of the mistake in every second paraphrasing of an earlier paraphrasing, resulting in a further phantom 100% each time. So it's not a trivial matter.

Cheers --

John
________________________________
--

.
"What is ironic here is that what is being held out as a justification for high regulation and compliance in the area of Complementary Medicines, Natural Products, Traditional Products, Supplements, Vitamins etc, is public safety and risk. Despite a diligent search of Coronial records and the literature, no instances have been found to demonstrate that in fact with these products in NZ there is any serious public health issue or risk to the public. The problem is clearly with prescription and other drugs and no demonstrable risk at all with these natural products… The Coronial and literature searches in so far as natural products etc are concerned and linkages to public safety and risk can be described legally as De minimis non curat lex. That is—of minimal risk importance. The law (regulations etc) does not and should not concern itself with trifles."

—D.W. Bain, Report to IM Health Trust: Complementary Medicines, Natural Products, Traditional Products, Supplements, Vitamins etc., Lamb, Bain & Laubscher, New Zealand, viewed Feb 20 2013, (emphasis added).

and we should NEVER forget.
vicki
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: Roger B
To: "Homeopathy minutus@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 10:30 AM
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
I confess that I get all worked up over terrorism. But the integral of my fretting over time is much greater for the medical so-called profession. I spend much more time hating their guts than terrorists, but I just can't get out of my mind those living people falling from the WTC.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: vickih_fla@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 07:05:23 -0700
Subject: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
I found an article on natural news with some numbers but most are based on a study from 2003. it speaks to the money the US spends on terrorism vs, health care and deaths resulting from each. but it does give some pretty scary numbers, especially for the deaths from OTC drugs that people assume completely harmless. i plucked a few quotes here and the link to the full story follows
Vicki

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes

According to the study led by Null, which involved a painstaking review of thousands of medical records, the United States spends $282 billion annually on deaths due to medical mistakes, or iatrogenic deaths

That means that prescription drugs in this country are at least 16,400 percent deadlier than terrorism. Again, those are the conservative numbers. A more realistic number, which would include deaths from over-the-counter drugs, makes drug consumption 32,000 percent deadlier than terrorism. But the scope of "Death by Medicine" is even wider. Conventional medicine, including unnecessary surgeries, bedsores and medical errors, is 104,700 percent deadlier than terrorism. Yet, our government's attention and money is not put into reforming health care.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html#ixzz2ZJMastZK
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: tamarque
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
John
It was around 1998 I think that the JAMA published the article stating 100,000 deaths annually
in American hospitals due to legally prescribed allopathic treatment.
It is many years since that article and that number is still used to describe the problem
However, people like Mercola have analyzed the situation and have come up with 1-2 million
deaths/year from allopathic ‘care.’ There reasoning is as follows:
1. These are only deaths that have been openly attributed to the care given. They do not
examine the many deaths attributed to cancer and heart disease or many other faux pas
of the medical industry.
2. Deaths caused by treatment in private institutions or outside of hospitals are not included in
these numbers. Doctors are not required to report adverse effects of any sort. It is a voluntary
system that most doctors ignore.
I saw some numbers from the UK this past year. They were reported at a lower number but somewhere
in the 10’s of thousands
Further, I think it reasonable to look at all the cancer deaths, heart disease, growing alzheimer and
Parkinson diseases and attribute them to the medical industry which refuses to link rotten nutrition
to all kinds of diseases and deaths. The medical industry’s active discouragement of looking to
nutrition is as much part of the medical industry treatment protocol as the toxic drugs they push.
It is failure numbers like this that make the medical industry hungry to prove harm from homeopathy, nutrition
and other holistic protocols.
t
From: John Harvey
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:49 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
Roger, your 50 million… you're not speaking globally here, are you. This figure is only for your country? You're in the U.S., I gather? I don't suppose you have a figure for global allopathic deaths and how it was calculated?
John
________________________________

What can be added to many of these numbers is how they get totally manipulated to
increase or decrease % for dramatic effect.
If you have a study with say 100 people and 8 people have the symptom or whatever it is that is being tested.
And the control group shows 2 people with the symptom Reporting that the test subjects had a 75% better
chance of whatever is far from true. There were 92 other people in the trial that just got eliminated from
the data. Medical research paid/influenced by chemical corporations is fraught with these distortions.
t
From: John Harvey
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 11:06 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US

I see that Null et al.'s paper has already been mentioned.
Roger, your figures here illustrate perfectly why it's actually a better idea to avoid the construction "so-many times more" unless you really understand it. Two times more is not in fact 100% more; it is 200% more. The common American practice of exaggerating numbers for marketing effect has led "two times as many" (i.e. 100% more) to be translated into "two times more" (i.e. three times as many, or 200% more), in the process unfortunately rendering the construction virtually useless in communication involving anybody in the U.S. Those in other countries tend to understand it, but the danger is always that the construction "X times more" either has come from a U.S. resident and actually means "X times as many" or may be misinterpreted by a U.S. resident as an expression of the U.S. exaggeration of "X times as many". For that reason, communication is clearest that avoids that construction altogether.
Easy clear alternatives include:
• "X times as many [or much],
• "X hundred percent times as many [or much]", and
• "[X minus one] hundred percent more".
The same consideration as applies to "X times more" applies to "X times deadlier than" and "X hundred percent deadlier than": was its deadliness really, say, 16,400 percent higher (i.e. 164 times higher, or 165 times as high), or was this an American numerical mistranslation of 16,400 percent times as high (i.e. 16,300 percent times higher)? You can't know without seeing the figures and working it out for yourself, and thus the declaration is useless in the first place.
I have in fact seen a report in which figures had undergone not one but two iterations of this exact mistake, resulting in percentages that, in perfectly good faith, the authors had ended up exaggerating by 200 percentage points. And there's nothing to stop reiteration of the mistake in every second paraphrasing of an earlier paraphrasing, resulting in a further phantom 100% each time. So it's not a trivial matter.
Cheers --
John
________________________________
--

.

"What is ironic here is that what is being held out as a justification for high regulation and compliance in the area of Complementary Medicines, Natural Products, Traditional Products, Supplements, Vitamins etc, is public safety and risk. Despite a diligent search of Coronial records and the literature, no instances have been found to demonstrate that in fact with these products in NZ there is any serious public health issue or risk to the public. The problem is clearly with prescription and other drugs and no demonstrable risk at all with these natural products… The Coronial and literature searches in so far as natural products etc are concerned and linkages to public safety and risk can be described legally as De minimis non curat lex. That is—of minimal risk importance. The law (regulations etc) does not and should not concern itself with trifles."
—D.W. Bain, Report to IM Health Trust: Complementary Medicines, Natural Products, Traditional Products, Supplements, Vitamins etc., Lamb, Bain & Laubscher, New Zealand, viewed Feb 20 2013, (emphasis added).

Oh, sorry about.

Another thing, the whole business with the 17th century (quick, what year does that century start with? 1600, 1700, 1800). There are informational and mathematical things embedded in human language that cause for fuzziness in our thinking. The 17th century started on January 1st, 1600. Knowing this, when I hear someone say 17th century, I deliberately in my mind think "1600s". Just like when you see something that cost $1.99 you should translate that in your mind to be $2.00 if you don't want the lying retailers to trick you.

Or another one, "The Blahblah empire fell in 4100 BC, give or take 300 years." Given that the USA is only 237 years and 13 days old, that 300 years makes for a lot of fuzziness and is a very long time.

More: BC or BCE vs. years-ago. The oldest musical instrument is 9000 years ago, or was it 9000 BCE? I am not sure which I remembered. So using the birth of Christ as a dating anchor is contributing fuzziness to the tune of 2013 years, and getting worse every year. I am not suggesting that we abandon it.

More: How many years are in the 20th century? 100. And the 19th century? 100. How many years are in the 1st century? 99. And the first century BC? I am not sure? Does it go like this 5 AD, 4 AD, 3 AD, 2 AD, 1 AD, Jesus is born [no year zero] 1 BC, 2 BC, 3 BC, 4 BC? Of course, that is a small amount of fuzziness.

(:->)

Roger Bird, still having fun with thought
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: vickih_fla@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 07:50:17 -0700
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
i did not write the article or the study, don't shoot the messenger.
THEY used it for dramatic effect. i understand your point about fluffery but the quotes are posted "after" my name. maybe you should email natural news about your concerns
i was just trying to give some numbers on allopahic deaths in US since that is where the conversation was trending.
vicki
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: Roger B
To: "Homeopathy minutus@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 10:27 AM
Subject: RE: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
Just a communications comment. When you get percentages so high, it is confusing and I worry if you mean 16,400% which equals 175 times more. Two times more would be 100% more. I never use percentages that high; I use the "times more". A less confusing way of putting it would be "we had 3000 deaths from terrorism and 700,000 deaths (numbers are for illustration purposes) from the medical profession". That way no one gets confused.

Roger
________________________________

To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
From: vickih_fla@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 07:05:23 -0700
Subject: [Minutus] Attention: Choir- allopathy deaths in US
I found an article on natural news with some numbers but most are based on a study from 2003. it speaks to the money the US spends on terrorism vs, health care and deaths resulting from each. but it does give some pretty scary numbers, especially for the deaths from OTC drugs that people assume completely harmless. i plucked a few quotes here and the link to the full story follows
Vicki

According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs. Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes

According to the study led by Null, which involved a painstaking review of thousands of medical records, the United States spends $282 billion annually on deaths due to medical mistakes, or iatrogenic deaths

That means that prescription drugs in this country are at least 16,400 percent deadlier than terrorism. Again, those are the conservative numbers. A more realistic number, which would include deaths from over-the-counter drugs, makes drug consumption 32,000 percent deadlier than terrorism. But the scope of "Death by Medicine" is even wider. Conventional medicine, including unnecessary surgeries, bedsores and medical errors, is 104,700 percent deadlier than terrorism. Yet, our government's attention and money is not put into reforming health care.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html#ixzz2ZJMastZK
Join the Campaign to Label GMO's in Florida
We have the Right to Know what is in our Food!
http://www.LabelGMOFlorida.com
Like us @ Label GMO Florida
on Fac ebook and Twitter
"Gluten Free Yummies"
www.GlutenFreeYummies.com

888-Yo-Yummy
________________________________

From: tamarque
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
John
It was around 1998 I think that the JAMA published the article stating 100,000 deaths annually
in American hospitals due to legally prescribed allopathic treatment.
It is many years since that article and that number is still used to describe the problem
However, people like Mercola have analyzed the situation and have come up with 1-2 million
deaths/year from allopathic ‘care.’ There reasoning is as follows:
1. These are only deaths that have been openly attributed to the care given. They do not
examine the many deaths attributed to cancer and heart disease or many other faux pas
of the medical industry.
2. Deaths caused by treatment in private institutions or outside of hospitals are not included in
these numbers. Doctors are not required to report adverse effects of any sort. It is a voluntary
system that most doctors ignore.
I saw some numbers from the UK this past year. They were reported at a lower number but somewhere
in the 10’s of thousands
Further, I think it reasonable to look at all the cancer deaths, heart disease, growing alzheimer and
Parkinson diseases and attribute them to the medical industry which refuses to link rotten nutrition
to all kinds of diseases and deaths. The medical industry’s active discouragement of looking to
nutrition is as much part of the medical industry treatment protocol as the toxic drugs they push.
It is failure numbers like this that make the medical industry hungry to prove harm from homeopathy, nutrition
and other holistic protocols.
t
From: John Harvey
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:49 AM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Attention: Choir
Roger, your 50 million… you're not speaking globally here, are you. This figure is only for your country? You're in the U.S., I gather? I don't suppose you have a figure for global allopathic deaths and how it was calculated?
John
________________________________