The Economist: a marketing arm of Big Pharma.
Recently, a relative (who describes himself as a “believer in science”) asked me what I thought generally about Ozempic (and, by implication its look-alikes), citing several Economist articles which he found rather exciting.
Not being a subscriber, I asked him to forward the articles, which he did. They are here:
Here’s my reply - verbatim.
Hi,
Thanks for forwarding those.
I used to subscribe to the Economist but have gone off it big time in recent years, as its output has essentially morphed into being indistinguishable – except in its pretentiousness – from most other mainstream media1.
I cannot begin to tell you how I feel about these articles. The title of “Pharma Frenzy” at least describes what is happening out there – there is a feeding frenzy to push these incredibly lucrative drugs into all and sundry.
These articles are nothing more than advertorials for these products. The underlying trials are not cited. I have, however, seen a few of the trials which have been touted for these, and I am not at all impressed, even if the results are taken at face value, which I don’t. (Have you ever looked into the scale of criminal fines which have been imposed on Big Pharma, and if so, why would you trust anything they say? Good list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements)
I wrote about one such trial / blitzkrieg campaign for semaglutide:
I love the way the Economist articles actually praise the “Prozac moment” – which heralded a disastrous societal descent into reliance on anti-depressants, which 20% of American adults now take, a barely believable statistic.
I wrote about SSRI inhibitors (the class to which Prozac belongs) here – it’s an article well worth reading as it illustrates much of what I am about to say:
https://sanityunleashed.substack.com/p/heres-a-real-pandemic
What I have discovered (and written extensively about) in recent years is this:
The pharma industry is more powerful than many or even most nations
It has corrupted most governments, regulators, and institutions we had hitherto regarded as independent
It has an iron-grip over medical publishing, medical education, and national prescribing policies
It has very significant influence over all media channels, including social media
All significant clinical trials are designed, analysed and then published under the control of pharma
Only positive results get published – negative data tends to be locked away metaphorically or literally
Hence overviews of information pertaining to pharma products are subject to publication bias under the control of those with a financial interest in the outcome
As for modern pharmaceuticals, I think we can summarise a general modus operandi:
A case is made for a drug using trials with questionable validity
The use cases are ruthlessly expanded by a series of even worse trials of questionable clinical relevance
Huge sums are spent promoting the product via many channels
The things which are wrong with most trials are that:
Treatment duration is usually very short
Only surrogate endpoints are observed (by that I mean a biological measure which is not clinically relevant)
No quality long-term data is usually gathered
The patient populations often don’t reflect real life
No “all-cause” data is collected
Data on interactions with other commonly-prescribed drugs is usually non-existent
So taking ozempik for weight loss as an example:
yes it makes people lose weight.
But at what cost?
Is it any good if people lose weight over a few months if it totally rebounds so that you have to be on it for life when there is no understanding of long-term effects
Moreover, there is a propensity for modern pharmaceuticals to target one specific pathway, these drugs being a prime example. This is seen as a good thing as it makes the drug “clean”, but in point of fact is not. These pathways are fundamental to our physiology in ways we don’t understand. They have evolved through millions of years. There are almost certainly going to be quite profound – but unpredictable - effects from interfering with them.
I will offer you another example of modern pharmaceuticals.
A friend of mine developed polymyalgia rheumatica from the injections commonly known as covid vaccines – (all inflammatory complaints are very common side effects of these products as they are pro-inflammatory by design).
So he is put onto a steroid.
Gets some stomach irritation (as is common) from those
So he is put on omeprazole to prevent ulceration by blocking stomach acid
But omeprazole causes calcium absorption, problems so he gets osteoporosis
So he is put on alendronic acid to counter than
This is part of the pharma-induced cascade. Now he is on a cocktail of drugs, the interactions between which are virtually impossible to predict.
Cutting off stomach acid production with omeprazole is another pharma-induced disaster…what on earth did people thing stomach acid was for? (More holistic treatments involve improving lower esophageal sphincter performance – including by increasing stomach acid – a more permanent solution which, moreover, does not fly in the face of evolved physiology.)
I have lost count of the number of people who have said to me that their parent / relative went into hospital confused and unable to walk and was taken off all drugs and improved dramatically!
Sorry to be a party pooper, but I would summarise my position thus:
The biopharma-industrial complex is as committed to good health as the arms industry is to world peace.
Best
Jonathan
Granted, I could have been much ruder but didn’t want to “lose the audience” so soon into my response!
Prozac was a failed weight loss drug, repurposed as an anti depressant and ozempic was a failed diabetes drug repurposed as a weight loss drug.
It seems like every time they have a failed drug they just use it elsewhere, without addressing the original fkin issues.
Same with the clot shots, way way before con-vid and mRNA vaporware bullshit, the lipid platform was causing the same issues. But for some reason the alt health people focus on spike protein and mRNA pseudoscience.
https://robc137.substack.com/p/years-before-mrna-and-spike-protein
That's a strong response.
I would add to your list that the very manner in which they create disease categorization, which gets the ball rolling for the "cures", is fraught with rigged studies and preset conclusions.
Public health policy is now strictly a matter of financialization constructed to benefit investors. Global healthcare spending hit a record high in 2021 at $9.8 trillion, or 10.3% of global gross domestic product (GDP).
Manufactured diseases, conditions, epidemics, pandemics etc. are all designed to create new investment products that increase the holdings of billionaires and further concentrate their wealth.
Flowing from this is government funding (free public money for the medical syndicate) to create financial products that transfer wealth from society to shareholders. Medicine is increasingly nothing but a financial product.
Virtually all of the politicians, academics, scientists and media parrots are spokespeople for the investor class and their job is to create financial instruments for the investor class which they happily do as they receive lavish kickbacks for their services.