Here is another citation: The article is, "The Epidemic of Sickness and Death from Prescription Drugs." The author is Donald Light, who teaches at Rowan University, and is the 2013 recipient of ASA's [American Sociological Association's] Distinguished Career Award for the Practice of Sociology. Light is a founding fellow of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania. In 2013, he was a fellow at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard. He is a Lokey Visiting Professor at Stanford University.
Donald Light: "Epidemiologically, appropriately prescribed, prescription drugs are the fourth leading cause of death, tied with stroke at about 2,460 deaths each week in the United States. About 330,000 patients die each year from prescription drugs in the United States and Europe. They [the drugs] cause an epidemic of about 20 times more hospitalizations [6.6 million annually], as well as falls, road accidents, and [annually] about 80 million medically minor problems such as pains, discomforts, and dysfunctions that hobble productivity or the ability to care for others. Deaths and adverse effects from overmedication, errors, and self-medication would increase these figures." (ASA publication, "Footnotes," November 2014)
The statistics I'm quoting reveal a problem on the level of a tsunami sweeping across the whole of America and Europe.
Why won't major media report these facts?
The obvious reason: their big-spending pharmaceutical advertisers would drop them like hot potatoes.
But there are other reasons.
Every medical bureaucrat or medical shill or medical expert who jumps aboard the media train, to assure the public that drugs and vaccines are remarkably safe, is sitting on the time bomb I have described above.
This is a key, key fact. If this bomb were widely recognized, who would continue to believe these professional pundits? Who would accept anything they say? How could they possibly sustain their credibility?
"Well, the system I represent kills 2.25 million people per decade, and maims between 20 and 40 million more people per decade, but I want to assure you this vaccine presents no problems at all. It's incredibly safe."
Every single pronouncement, on any subject, issued via the medical cartel's Ministry of Truth would fall on disbelieving ears, and only increase general outrage.
Mainstream reporters and editors and publishers are well aware that telling the truth and continuing to pound on it would undermine a basic institution of society.
The media are there to give credibility to society and its structures. That's why they're called "major" instead of "minor."
When hard rains fall, the media are there with an umbrella to hold over organized society's head. To walk away in the middle of a downpour would leave the status quo unprotected.
"Defending the Crown" is another way to put it. The King may make mistakes, he may commit heinous offenses, but he is the King, and therefore his position must remain secure.
Young journalists learn this point quickly. If in their zeal, they cross the threshold and attempt to expose a central myth, fairy tale, legend, they're put back in their place. They absorb the message. Journalism has limits. Certain truths are silent truths.
Over the years, I've talked to reporters who are solidly addicted to obfuscations. Like any addict, they have an army of excuses to rationalize their behavior.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).