Connect with us

Awareness

The History, Medicinal Uses & Science Behind The Use Of Essential Oils

Published

on

“We each have the innate ability to heal ourselves. To empower ourselves with natural solutions, instead of succumbing to life-altering chemicals. There’s a time and place for pharmaceuticals, but it shouldn’t be the first answer, nor the only form treatment.”
Dana Arcuri – author, speaker, wellness coach

advertisement - learn more

If you like to take care of you and your family’s health safely and naturally, you might want to consider adding some essential oils to your medicine cabinet.

Essential oils have been used throughout recorded history for a wide variety of health-related applications. The very wise Egyptians were some of the first people to use essential oils extensively in their medical practice, beauty treatments, food preparation, and religious ceremonies.

Frankincense, sandalwood, myrrh, and cinnamon were considered incredibly valuable cargo along the caravan trade routes and were sometimes exchanged in return for gold.

history-of-aromatherapy

The Greeks discovered the Egyptian’s methods and also used essential oils in their practices of therapeutic massage and aromatherapy. The ancient Romans also used essential oils to promote health and personal hygiene amongst their people. Chinese and Indian Ayurvedics also used aromatic herbs, and the Persians began to improve distillation methods for extracting essential oils from aromatic plants and herbs.

advertisement - learn more

When King Tut’s tomb was opened, 350 liters of essential oils were discovered in alabaster jars.

Moses used essential oils and this is referenced in the bible. In the book of Exodus, the Lord refers to holy anointing oil that was a specific ‘god formula’ (source plus free ebook here)

Essential oil extracts were used throughout the dark ages in Europe for their anti-bacterial and fragrant properties. When the plague broke out, essential oils were used to help treat sick patients. (source)

More recently, in 1937, the very powerful healing properties of essential oils were rediscovered by a famous French chemist, Rene-Maurice Gattefosse, who healed a very badly burnt hand with pure lavender oil.

Another French contemporary, Dr. Jean Valnet, used therapeutic-grade essential oils to successfully treat injured soldiers during World War II. He then went on to become a world leader in the development of respected aromatherapy practices. The modern use of essential oils has continued to grow incredibly rapidly as health scientists and medical practitioners continue to research and validate the benefits of therapeutic-grade essential oil.

bg_drvalnet

Dr Jean Valnet

Exciting Research

Why are essential oils so effective for beauty and health? It’s because they are composed of very small molecules that can penetrate very deeply and quickly into the cells. This is caused transdermal delivery. They even can cross the blood-brain barrier.

For a long time, lovers of essential oils lacked solid scientific proof of the efficacy of essential oils, and the medical industry labelled their use as a “quack” treatment (some still do!), but there have now been thousands of studies examining exactly what essential oils can do for health and well-being. If you look at pubmed, there are over tens of thousands of studies using essential oils. Searching for “essential oils cancer” brings up 641 results.  If you have the time to look check out pubmed

PL2000008657_card_lg

Oils are doing wonders for other health ailments too. Check out some of these articles:

  • Frankincense Superior to Chemotherapy in Killing Late-Stage Ovarian Cancer Cells (source)
  • Lavender Aromatherapy Proven to Calm Premenstrual Emotions (source)
  • Peppermint has 15 proven health benefits (source)
  • Natural Ear Infection Alternatives to Antibiotics Proven Safer and More Effective (source)
  • Lavender for Migraines (source)
  • Clove oil tested to be the most effective repellent against mosquitos (source)
  • Lavender has anti-fungal activity against candida albicans (source)
  • Cinnamon verum bark has the highest antimicrobial activity, particularly against antibiotic resistant strains 

It’s pretty clear that essential oils are an effective way to treat common and more serious ailments.

Here are some Doctors speaking about how using Essential Oils changed their approach to the way they treat their patients

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIe96KecmuU

Dr. Mercola’s Top 5 Recommended Oils and Their Benefits

Dr. Mercola is a medical doctor who very much understands how beneficial organic essential oils are for human health. Here are his top 5 essential oils, and what they have been shown to help with:

Sandalwood 

  • Low self-esteem
  • Insecurity
  • Stress
  • Enhanced sleep
  • Female reproductive and endocrine health
  • Urinary tract infections
  • Bronchitis
  • Stretch marks
  • Depression
  • Laryngitis
  • Sensitive skin

Lavender

  • Anxiety
  • Depression
  • Irritability
  • Mental fatigue
  • Panic attacks
  • Stress
  • Oily skin
  • Bruises
  • Stretch marks
  • Earache
  • Chickenpox
  • Hypertension
  • Vertigo
  • Whooping cough
  • Flatulence

Cedarwood

  • Anxiety
  • Skin problems like acne, psoriasis, dandruff, and dermatitis
  • Arthritis
  • Bronchitis
  • Coughing
  • Cystitis
  • Stress
  • Insect repellant
  • Hair loss
  • Tuberculosis
  • Gonorrhoea

Peppermint

  • Mental fatigue
  • Nausea
  • Headache
  • Exhaustion
  • Vertigo
  • Asthma
  • Flatulence
  • Sinusitis

Frankinsense

  • Insecurity
  • Grief
  • Immune system stimulation
  • Cancer
  • Depression
  • Allergies
  • Headache
  • Herpes
  • Brain damage from head injuries
  • Panic Attacks
  • Anxiety
  • Asthma
  • Coughing
  • Bronchitis
  • Scars
  • Stress
  • Stretch marks, stress (Source)

That’s an impressive list, isn’t it? And it’s only a drop in the ocean considering how many more types of essential oils are out there.

Which Ones To Use? Trusted Essential Oil Brands

There are so many essential oil brands on the market today it is indeed a huge industry. However, not all oils are created equal, and in fact most brands are simply not pure. They are often made synthetically, offering no benefits to your health and with some experts saying that they are in fact very toxic. Many “natural” smelling products don’t contain anything natural – no pure oils at all, just fake scents made in a lab.

Fortunately there are companies out there who produce essential oils that are not only pure, but are of the highest standard you can possibly find.

essential-oils-for-a-hectic-lifestyle-image

From the United Kingdom, is my favourite (not affiliated to CE by the way) choice, NHR organic oils. They have the largest range of Soil Association Certified organic essential oils in the world. They also sell distiller kits for people who want to make their own oils at home and their selection of organic chocolates made with some of their oils are absolutely amazing.

There are many other excellent brands out there Dr Josh Axe, also has a range of top quality oils, and so does Organixx

Need More Proof Essential Oils Really Work?

To discover more scientific proof about how essential oils work on physical and emotional health please visit:

aromaticscience.com  Just type in the name of the essential oil or ailment and you will find so much amazing stuff comes up! It’s absolutely fascinating to read.

History Of Essential Oils

Essential_Oils_info-9-0

image from Greenmedinfo

Cooking With Essential Oils

Recipe: Black Bean Peppermint Chocolate Brownies

When you use good quality oils you can even cook with them. If you love mint, for example, adding peppermint to a chocolate smoothie will awaken your tastebuds – you’ve never tasted a better mint when using pure essential oils. A few drops go a very long way so don’t worry, you won’t be using up your bottles too quickly.

I’ve got a great recipe from the doTerra blog for you to try.

Black bean brownies are a delicious and nutritious twist to a traditional chocolate brownie. You might be nervous about baking with black beans, but don’t be – they have a very mild flavor and are extremely rich, creamy, and full of protein. You can also boost the flavor of your brownie with essential oils such as Peppermint, Wild Orange, Cinnamon, or even Lavender.

Essential-doTERRA-Recipe-Delious-Black-Bean-Brownies

Ingredients:

1 (15 ounce) can black beans, drained, and rinsed
2 large eggs
1/4 cup cocoa powder
2/3 cup honey
1/3 cup coconut oil
½ teaspoon baking powder
Pinch of salt
4 drops Peppermint essential oil
¾ cup chocolate chips, divided

DSC_0295

Directions:

1. Preheat oven to 350 degrees.

2. Place all ingredients, except for chocolate chips, in a blender or food processor and blend until smooth.

DSC_0320

DSC_0322

DSC_0328

3. Pour batter into large bowl and stir in 1/2 cup of chocolate chips.

Black-Bean-Brownie

Black-Bean-Brownies

4. Pour into greased 8×8-inch pan and top with ¼ cup chocolate chips.

Delicious-Black-Bean-Brownies

5. Bake for 30-35 minutes or until a toothpick inserted in the middle comes out clean. Let cool and cut into pieces. Store in refrigerator.

Eat and enjoy!

DSC_05337

For more recipes and information please click here:

* It’s important to note that essential oils are incredibly powerful and need to be used very very wisely. You need to know what can or can’t be put on skin directly, and only use internally under the care of someone who really knows what they are doing.  I’ve burnt myself using too many drops of certain oils in the bath and have been silly in the past putting some oils on my skin undiluted – ouch!

You also must take care when pregnant or breastfeeding. There are some oils that are contraindicated.

When used properly, essential oils can be absolutely amazing for you and your family’s well-being.

A Quick Important Notice:

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Awareness

Brain Imaging Shows Autistic Brains Contain HIGH Amounts of Aluminum

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A study published early in 2018 identified very high amounts of aluminum lodged in the brains of multiple autistic people.

  • Reflect On:

    We know little about where the heavy metals used as adjuvants in vaccines and where they end up in the body. We now know that injected aluminum doesn't exit the body like aluminum intake from other sources. When injected, it ends up in the brain

A study published earlier in 2018 should have made headlines everywhere, as it discovered historically high amounts of aluminum in autistic brains. The study was conducted by some of the worlds leading scientists in the field.

Five people were used in the study, four males and one female, all between the ages of 14-50. Each of their brains contained unsafe and high amounts of aluminum compared to patients with other diseases where high brain aluminum content is common, like Alzheimer’s disease, for example.

Of course, this caused people to downplay the study, citing a low sample group, but that’s not entirely a valid argument given the reason why this study was conducted. As cited in the study above, recent studies on animals, published within the past few years, have supported a strong connection between aluminum, and aluminum adjuvants used in human vaccinations, and Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD.)

Studies have also shown that injected aluminum does not exit the body, and can be detected inside the brain even a year after injection. That being said, when we take aluminum in from sources such as food, the body does a great job of getting it out, but there is a threshold. It’s important to acknowledge that the aluminum found in the brain, could be due to the presence of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines. This latest study also identified the location of aluminum in these tissues, and where they end up. This particular study was done on humans, which builds upon, and still supports, the findings of the animal studies.

This is also important because the majority of studies that previously examined human exposure to aluminum have only used hair, blood and urine samples. The study also makes a clear statement regarding vaccines, stating that “Paediatric vaccines that include an aluminum adjuvant are an indirect measure of infant exposure to aluminum and their burgeoning use has been directly correlated with increasing prevalence of ASD.”

 Aluminum, in this case, was found in all four lobes of the brain.

advertisement - learn more

The aluminum content of brain tissues from donors with a diagnosis of ASD was extremely high (Table 1). While there was significant inter-tissue, inter-lobe and inter-subject variability the mean aluminium content for each lobe across all 5 individuals was towards the higher end of all previous (historical) measurements of brain aluminium content, including iatrogenic disorders such as dialysisencephalopathy[13][15][16][17][18][19]. All 4 male donors had significantly higher concentrations of brain aluminum than the single female donor. We recorded some of the highest values for brain aluminum content ever measured in healthy or diseased tissues in these male ASD donors

We Know, And Have Known, Aluminum Is Not Safe, Yet We Ignore It

When we talk about the ‘safe’ amount of aluminum here, there is no such thing. Aluminum is extremely toxic to any biological process, it’s not meant for us which is why it stayed deep within the Earth until we took it out. It has no place within us, and that’s simply due to the fact that it causes nothing but havoc. This makes it odd that we would put them in vaccinations despite the fact that for 100 years there has been no appropriate safety testing.

Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted. Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans.

The quote above comes from a study published in 2011, it’s 2018 now and we’ve come along way in our understanding. We are starting to see even more research confirming the statement above.

Almost every study you read regarding previous studies on aluminum adjuvants within vaccines emphasized how the nature of its bioaccumulation is unknown, and a serious matter. We now know that it goes throughout the body, into distant organs eventually ends up in the brain.

Another fairly recent study from 2015 points out:

Evidence that aluminum-coated particles phagocytozed in the injected muscle and its draining lymph notes can disseminate within phagocytes throughout the body and slowly accumulate in the brain further suggests that alum safety should be evaluated in the long term.(source)

The pictures below come from the recent 2018 study and show ‘bright spots’ that indicate heavy metals in the brain.

 

The more recent study discussed in this article is adding to that evidence. Below you can watch one of the most recent interviews with Dr. Eric Exly, one of the world’s foremost leading authors on the subject, and one of the authors of this most recent study. He is a Biologist (University of Stirling) with a Ph.D. in the ecotoxicology of aluminum. You can read more about his background here.

Take Away

People need to understand that despite media bullying, it’s ok to question vaccine safety, and there is plenty of reason to. There are many concerns, and heavy metals are one of them. In fact, the persistence and abundant presence of heavy metals in our environment, foods and medications is a concern, one that has been the clear cause for a variety of health ailments, yet it’s one that’s hardly addressed by the medical industry.

You can detox from this with items such as Spirulina, and waters that contain a high Silica content. There are studies that show various methods of detoxing can be used to get this lodged aluminum, or some of it, out of your body, organs and brain. This is where educating yourself regarding the medicinal value of food and nutrition is a key Perhaps this can be a motivation to better your diet, especially if you have, are someone, or know someone with an ASD diagnosis.

A Quick Important Notice:

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Awareness

The CDC’s Influenza Math Doesn’t Add Up: Exaggerating the Death Toll to Sell Flu Shots

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The flu shot is irresponsibly marketed, unnecessary and in some cases dangerous. This perspective comes from many people and health professionals, yet it's a narrative that's constantly ignored.

  • Reflect On:

    Is a flu shot really necessary? Are our immune systems suffering from a lack of real immunity? Are vaccines doing more harm than good?

Every year at about this time, public health officials and their media megaphones start up the drumbeat to encourage everyone (including half-year-old infants, pregnant women and the invalid elderly) to get a flu shot. Never mind that more often than not the vaccines don’t work, and sometimes even increase the risk of getting sick.

To buttress their alarmist message for 2018-2019, representatives from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other health agencies held a press conference and issued a press release on September 27, citing a particularly “record-breaking” (though unsubstantiated) 80,000 flu deaths last year. Having “medical experts and public health authorities publicly…state concern and alarm (and predict dire outcomes)” is part and parcel of the CDC’s documented playbook for “fostering public interest and high…demand” for flu shots. CDC’s media relations experts frankly admit that “framing” the current flu season as “more severe than last or past years” or more “deadly” is a highly effective strategy for garnering strong interest and attention from both the media and the public.

If accurate, 80,000 deaths would represent an enormous (and mystifying) one-year jump—tens of thousands more flu deaths compared to the already inflated numbers presented for 2016 (and every prior year).

Peter Doshi (associate editor at The BMJ and a MIT graduate) has criticized the CDC’s “aggressive” promotion of flu shots, noting that although the annual public health campaigns deliver a “who-in-their-right-mind-could-possibly-disagree message,” the “rhetoric of science” trotted out each year by public health officials has a “shaky scientific basis.” Viewed within the context of Doshi’s remarks, the CDC’s high-flying flu numbers for 2017-2018 raise a number of questions. If accurate, 80,000 deaths would represent an enormous (and mystifying) one-year jump—tens of thousands more flu deaths compared to the already inflated numbers presented for 2016 (and every prior year). Moreover, assuming a roughly six-month season for peak flu activity, the 80,000 figure would translate to an average of over 13,300 deaths per month—something that no newspaper last year came close to reporting.

The CDC’s statistics are impervious to independent verification because they remain, thus far, unpublished—despite the agency’s pledge on its website to base its public health pronouncements on high-quality data derived openly and objectively. Could the CDC’s disappointment with influenza vaccination coverage—which lags far behind the agency’s target of 80%—have anything to do with the opacity of the flu data being used to peddle the unpopular and ineffective vaccines?

Fudging facts

There are a variety of reasons to question the precision with which the CDC likes to imbue its flu statistics. First, although the CDC states that it conducts influenza mortality surveillance with its partner agencies, there is no actual requirement for U.S. states to report adult flu deaths to the CDC. (In public health parlance, adult influenza deaths are not “reportable” or “nationally notifiable.”) In fact, the only “flu-associated deaths” that the CDC requires states and other jurisdictions to report are deaths in children—180 last year.

advertisement - learn more

…when actual death certificates are tallied, influenza deaths on average are little more than 1,000 yearly.

How did the CDC reach its as-yet-unpublished conclusion—widely shared with the media—that 79,820 American adults in addition to 180 children died from the flu in 2017-2018? The agency states that it relies on death certificate data. However, members of the Cochrane research community have observed that “when actual death certificates are tallied, influenza deaths on average are little more than 1,000 yearly.”

Other knowledgeable individuals have also noted that the death records system in the U.S. is subjective, incomplete and politicized, and have suggested that citizens should adopt a “healthy skepticism about even the most accepted, mainstream, nationally reported CDC or other ‘scientific’ statistics.” This skepticism may be especially warranted for the influenza stats, which are so inextricably intertwined with the CDC’s vaccination agenda that the statistical techniquesand assumptions that the agency uses focus specifically on “project[ing] the burden of influenza that would have occurred in the absence of vaccination.”

skepticism may be especially warranted for the influenza stats, which are so inetricably intertwined with the CDC’s vaccination agenda.

Notwithstanding its incessant use of influenza statistics to justify its flu vaccine policies, the CDC tries to have it both ways, cautioning that because “influenza activity reporting…is voluntary,” influenza surveillance in the U.S. “cannot be used to ascertain how many people have become ill with influenza during the influenza season.” A larger problem is that the vital statistics that form the basis of the CDC’s surveillance data conflate deaths from pneumonia and influenza (P&I). The CDC concedes that this conflation complicates the challenge of specifically estimating flu deaths:

The system “tracks the proportion of death certificates processed that list pneumonia or influenza as the underlying or contributing cause of death. This system…does not provide an exact number of how many people died from flu” [emphasis added].

Curiously, the CDC presented its cause-of-death data slightly differently prior to 2015. Through 2014, the agency’s annual National Vital Statistics Reports included tables showing influenza deaths and pneumonia deaths as separate line items. Those reports made it abundantly clear that pneumonia deaths (at least as transmitted by death certificates) consistently and dramatically outstripped influenza deaths. The table below illustrates this pattern for 2012-2014.

Starting in 2015, the annual vital statistics reports began displaying P&I together and eliminated the distinct line items. At present, only one tool remains to examine mortality associated with influenza as distinct from pneumonia—the CDC’s interactive FluView dashboard—which provides weekly national breakdowns. The dashboard shows the same general pattern as in the annual reports—that is, lower numbers of influenza deaths and much higher numbers of pneumonia deaths. Bearing in mind all the shortcomings and potential biases of death certificate data, dashboard reports for the first week of March (week 9) for the past three years show 257 influenza deaths versus 4,250 pneumonia deaths in 2016, and 534 and 736 flu deaths (versus over 4,000 annual pneumonia deaths) in 2017 and 2018, respectively.

When clinicians in outpatient settings do order testing, relatively few of the “flu” specimens—sometimes as low as 1%—actually test positive for influenza.

Semantic shenanigans

Semantics also play a key role in the CDC’s slippery communications about “flu.” For example, CDC’s outpatient surveillance focuses on the broad category of “influenza-like illness” (ILI)—an almost meaningless term describing general symptoms (fever, cough and/or sore throat) that any number of non-influenza viruses are equally capable of triggering. Cochrane lists several problems with the reliance on ILI to make inferences about influenza:

  • There is “no reliable system to monitor and quantify the epidemiology and impact of ILI” and no way of knowing what proportion of ILI is caused by influenza.
  • There are almost no reliable data on the number of ILI-related physician contacts or hospitalizations—and no one knows what proportion of ILI doctor visits and hospitalizations are due to influenza.

“Pneumonia,” too, is a catch-all diagnosis covering lung infections caused by a variety of different agents: viruses (non-influenza as well as influenza), bacteriafungiair pollutants and many others. Interestingly, hospitalization is a common route of exposure to pneumonia-causing pathogens, and mortality from hospital-acquired pneumonia exceeds 60%. In a plausible scenario, an adult hospitalized for suspected (but unconfirmed) “flu” could acquire a lethal pneumonia bug in the hospital, and their death might be chalked up to “flu” regardless of the actual facts, particularly because clinicians do not necessarily order influenza testing. When clinicians in outpatient settings do order testing, relatively few of the “flu” specimens—sometimes as low as 1%—actually test positive for influenza. Over the past couple of decades, the proportion of specimens testing positive has averaged around 15%—meaning that about 85% of suspected “flu” specimens are not, in fact, influenza.

Roughly four-fifths of the vaccine injury and death cases settled through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program are flu-vaccine-related.

Propaganda with a purpose

It takes little subtlety to recognize that the principal reason for flu hyperbole is to sell more vaccines. However, more and more people—even infectious disease specialists—are realizing that flu shots are fraught with problems. Roughly four-fifths of the vaccine injury and death cases settled through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program are flu-vaccine-related. A University of Toronto-based expert recently stated, “We have kind of hyped this vaccine so much for so long we are starting to believe our own hype.”

Pro-flu-vaccination studies—through their skillful placement in prestigious journals—tend to drown out other influenza studies that should be ringing warning bells. Published peer-reviewed studies show that:

  • Previous influenza vaccination, particularly in those who get a flu shot every year, diminishes or “blunts” the already low effectiveness of flu shots.
  • Getting vaccinated against influenza increases susceptibility to other severe respiratory viruses and also to other strains of influenza.
  • Mothers who receive influenza vaccines during pregnancy face an increased risk of miscarriages and their offspring face elevated risks of birth defects and autism.

A systematic review of influenza vaccine trials by Cochrane in 2010 urges the utmost caution. Noting that “studies funded from public sources [have been] significantly less likely [than industry-funded studies] to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines,” and citing evidence of “widespread manipulation of conclusions,” the Cochrane reviewers’ bottom line is that “reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin.” We should all keep those words in mind the next time the CDC and the media try to mischaracterize flu facts and science.

CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured.  Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission. Please visit our crowdfunding page.

A Quick Important Notice:

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Awareness

Purdue Pharma Funds ‘Opioid Antagonist’ In Obvious Ploy To Appear To Actually Care

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Purdue Pharma is providing a $3.42 million grant to 'Harm Reduction Therapeutics' to advance the development of its low-cost, over-the-counter (OTC) naloxone nasal spray which purportedly can reverse the effects of opioid overdose.

  • Reflect On:

    Can we use the blatant deception that characterizes marketing efforts of Big Pharma as motivation to really spread awareness amongst our friends, family and our fellow humans about better practices of health and wellness?

In the CE article ‘Study Reveals Big Pharma Paid Doctors Millions of Dollars To Push Opioids,’ Kalee Brown makes a cogent argument that the Opioid epidemic, which is responsible for at least two thirds of the record 72,000 overdose deaths in the U. S. last year, is the product of a carefully crafted strategy that stems from a sinister alignment of  self-interest between Big Pharma, doctors, and the government. This strategy, it would seem, has no limits to its wickedness:

It’s no secret that Big Pharma is a money-making machine. Many even suggest that they design drugs with negative side effects so you remain sick, thus growing their market of sick consumers — a view supported by the reality that doctors get compensated for selling you drugs, not for getting you off of them.

It’s not as though there is not a clear understanding about this among awakening individuals. There are numerous people who individually and collectively are fighting against this evil. Many have spurred efforts by city and state officials to sue Purdue Pharma, makers of the ruthlessly marketed opioid Oxycontin that is at the center of this epidemic. These efforts have made some inroads, in that they have stopped their aggressive marketing campaign in the US.

How They Defend Themselves

Typically, Purdue Pharma will argue in court that they should not be to blame for the recommendations of doctors or the free will choices of patients. This despite the fact that court cases have revealed that one of the prongs of their marketing strategy is to get doctors to minimize the dangers of Oxycontin in their discussions with their patients, or to deceive the doctors altogether about the dangers of Oxycontin.

Before becoming aware of how the pharmaceutical industry worked, I would have assumed (naively) that if a pharmaceutical company saw that its medications were causing harm to people (let alone an epidemic of overdose deaths) they would quickly take their product off the market. And short of that, doctors would simply stop prescribing the drug to their patients in deference to the Hippocratic oath they took which dictates primarily to “Do no harm.” Alas, far too many doctors do not take their oath to heart, preferring instead to defer their responsibility to the recommendations of regulatory agencies like the FDA and continue to take their profits for writing up prescriptions.

As for taking Oxycontin off the market? Well everybody knows by now that profit, not human health or even human life, is the sole decision-making marker for pharmaceutical giants like Purdue Pharma. And despite the inconvenience of all these lawsuits, they are willing to deal with those so long as the legal costs remain covered by the outlandish profits that Oxycontin and other opioids continue to generate.

advertisement - learn more

Staying In The Game

In their minds, there are still too many people who are in pain and want that pain alleviated the easy way, through drugs, they are willing to listen to their doctors, and trust the FDA and other government agencies. In other words, there is still too much money to be made to actually take the product off the market.

Having said that, with sales in decline, and restrictions now on their formerly successful marketing maneuvers, how can they position themselves to keep the lucrative Oxycontin game going longer?

Perhaps it was the new guy in the think-tank that raised his hand and came up with this outrageous idea one day. “Hey, why don’t we fund and promote a drug that we can say prevents death by overdose from Oxycontin? We can say it’s coming from some non-profit called, hmm, er, ‘Harm Reduction Therapeutics.’ Yeah. Some people will think we’re heroes!”

Don’t laugh. That’s exactly what they’ve done. Whether ‘Harm Reduction Therapeutics’ is truly an independent non-profit or the brainchild of Big Pharma giants doesn’t matter. The game remains the same.

New Wrinkle Of Depravity

And so just when we think we’ve seen and reported on all the possible depravity coming from Big Pharma, a new wrinkle appears on an already hideous face. And we don’t need to read any anti-Big Pharma commentary to see it. The thinly veiled ruse is broadcast on their website for all to see:

STAMFORD, Conn. and PITTSBURGH, Penn., September 5, 2018 – Purdue Pharma L.P. (Purdue) and Harm Reduction Therapeutics, Inc. today announced that Purdue is providing a $3.42 million grant to Harm Reduction Therapeutics to advance the development of its low-cost, over-the-counter (OTC) naloxone nasal spray in the United States. Naloxone is an opioid antagonist used to reverse the effects of a life-threatening opioid overdose.

Harm Reduction Therapeutics is an independent, non-profit pharmaceutical company whose mission is to “prevent opioid overdose deaths by making low-cost naloxone available to everyone.” Purdue’s contributions will help Harm Reduction Therapeutics accelerate the development of its OTC naloxone nasal spray by approximately 12 months.

This product will provide a low-cost alternative to prescription naloxone for both consumers and first responders. Given the nature of this grant, no revenues or royalties will be paid to Purdue.

The U.S. Surgeon GeneralFood and Drug AdministrationU.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and The President’s Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis all recommend expanded use of naloxone due to its potential for saving lives. Unfortunately, cost has been a barrier, especially in communities hardest hit by the opioid crisis.1

“Purdue is committed to advancing patient care and public safety. While naloxone accessibility cannot be seen as a single solution, it must be part of our collective actions,” said Craig Landau, MD, president and CEO, Purdue Pharma. “This grant is one example of the meaningful steps Purdue is taking to help address opioid abuse in our communities. Collaborating with a variety of partners is crucial to address the crisis we’re facing, and we are honored to support Harm Reduction Therapeutics as they work to prevent opioid-related deaths by increasing access to naloxone.”

So follow along here: instead of taking Oxycontin off the market, they’ve decided to gift a ‘Harm Reduction’ non-profit organization with a research grant of $3.42 million (peanuts) to hurry up with their low cost death-defying product. Purdue will receive no revenues or royalties from this low cost product, and thus can now position themselves as a company that is committed to ‘advancing patient care and public safety’ by showing their heartfelt concern about the opioid epidemic (which they caused).

The reality? Getting this low-cost ‘overdose prevention nasal spray’ into circulation as quickly as possible will actually allow them to get more people on to Oxycontin and prevent some others from breaking their addiction to it. Purdue’s hope is that the fear these patients might have about all the overdose deaths they’ve heard about may be assuaged by having access to a ‘super nasal spray’ to save them from the brink of death–if, that is, they are in any condition to properly operate the nasal spray in the throes of a drug overdose episode.

The Takeaway

Most of the readers of this article are likely aware of the nature of the Pharmaceutical Industry, and by extension the nature of the Western Medical Establishment in general. But reminders like this may help in giving us the courage to bring up such deceptive practices with friends and family who still think that Western medicine is geared towards our health, or that powerful opioids are really the best option for our symptoms.

Our compassion with others is fueled by our understanding, and in this way the blatantly self-serving actions like those of Purdue Pharma can help us to speak and act more effectively with our friends and loved ones, and help them reach a higher state of awareness about our health and how we can deal more safely with our pain.

A Quick Important Notice:

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

EL