Archive for April, 2021

Just How Powerful is Big Pharma?

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/04/06/big-pharma-lobbying

Just How Powerful Is Big Pharma?

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
April 6, 2021
big pharma lobbying
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
  • Spending on pharmaceutical industry lobbying also reached a record amount in 2020, at more than $306 million, compared to $299 million in 2019
  • There were 1,502 pharmaceutical lobbyists in 2020, 63.58% of whom were former government employees
  • The top pharmaceutical lobbyist in 2020 was the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which spent $25.9 million, making them the third top lobbying spender overall
  • The marketing of prescription drugs, health services, laboratory tests and disease awareness rose to $29.9 billion in 2016
  • The Wellcome Trust is a top funder of health research globally and has been a major player in the COVID-19 pandemic, even though it’s invested heavily in companies making COVID-19 treatments

While much of the world slowed to a halt during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, one thing remained steady — lobbying efforts. Spending on lobbying reached $3.48 billion in 2020, which is just under 2019’s record of $3.5 billion.1 The numbers were revealed by OpenSecrets.org, which tracks federal campaign contributions and lobbying data.

The health sector spent the most on lobbying in 2020 — a record $615 million. The efforts paid off, and, Open Secrets reported, “Congress delivered massive windfalls to hospitals and the federal government awarded lucrative contracts to pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers.”2

Spending on pharmaceutical industry lobbying also reached a record amount in 2020, at more than $306 million, compared to $299 million in 2019.3

PhRMA: Top Pharmaceutical Lobbyist for 2020

There were 1,502 pharmaceutical lobbyists in 2020, 63.58% of whom were former government employees.4 A revolving door, in which government employees and former members of Congress take jobs with lobbying firms, is common among lobbyists, and the reverse also occurs, in which people from the private sector end up in government positions.

The top pharmaceutical lobbyist in 2020 was the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), which spent $25.9 million,5 making them the third top lobbying spender overall, behind only the National Association of Realtors and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.6 PhRMA also runs the nonprofit PhRMA Foundation, which gives grants for research that can be funneled all the way to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The FDA does not accept corporate money, but it does receive money funneled to them via nonprofit foundations, which may receive money from other nonprofits funded by private interests, including PhRMA. Take, for instance, the Reagan-Udall Foundation, a nonprofit foundation created by Congress in 2007 to support scientific research that is of interest to the FDA.

The Reagan-Udall Foundation said it would only accept grants from government, individual donors and other nonprofits, not industry, but in 2010 it received a $150,000 grant from the PhRMA Foundation which, being a nonprofit, technically fit the definition of an acceptable funding source, even though it’s founded and funded by drug companies.7

Other Top Big Pharma Lobbyists in 2020

After PhRMA, other top pharmaceutical lobbyists in 2020 included:8

Biotechnology Innovation Organization — $12.56 million Amgen — $11.15 million
Pfizer — $10.87 million Roche Holdings — $10.87 million
AbbVie — $7.07 million Gilead Sciences — $7.03 million
Merck — $6.98 million Pharmaceutical Care Management Association — $6.92 million
Bayer — $6.70 million Novartis — $6.15 million
Eli Lilly & Co. — $5.83 million Horizon Therapeutics — $5.76 million
Johnson & Johnson — $5.57 million Bristol-Myers Squibb — $5.39 million
Medtronic — $5 million

Lobbying was heavy during the first quarter, when industries were eager to influence the first COVID-19 stimulus package.9 Many of the lobbyists also had close ties to congressional leaders. According to Open Secrets:10

“Over 1,000 clients dispatched lobbyists with close ties to the White House or congressional leaders through the first half of 2020. About 40 percent of those clients reported lobbying on issues related to the pandemic.

Pharmaceutical companies that received massive windfalls from the federal government to swiftly develop COVID-19 vaccines deployed Washington insiders. So did firms tasked with producing ventilators, and businesses in hard-hit industries angling for government aid. Companies that had not lobbied during the … administration — or ever before — signed contracts with K Street firms.

The vast majority of these clients are businesses or trade associations, which make up nearly 90 percent of lobbying spending this year. The success of revolving door lobbyists indicates that powerful interests saw former aides to top officials as their best chance to influence high-level negotiations that mostly sidelined rank-and-file lawmakers.”

Big Pharma Lobbying on the Rise

Annual lobbying on pharmaceuticals and health products has been on the rise since 2013,11 and in 2019 the pharmaceutical industry was the top lobbying group in Washington, spending far more than any other industry. Among their top priorities that year was fiercely opposing a bill that would reduce drug costs.12

From 2018 to 2019, some major increases were noted, including for Akebia Therapeutics, which manufactures drugs for kidney disease. Their spending increased from $110,000 in 2018,13 to $1.8 million in 2019,14 and $1.6 million in 2020.15 AbbVie, which manufactures Humira, has also steadily increased spending, from $4.3 million in 2018 to $5.4 million in 2019,16 reaching over $7 million in 2020.17

“That spending,” Open Secrets noted, “comes on top of the industry’s many ad campaigns designed to influence lawmakers and the general public. The industry fights threatening legislation in creative ways, including funding prominent but unrelated associations to push pro-industry messages on the airwaves.”18

PhRMA, for instance, funds the Partnership for Safe Medicines, which is a nonprofit group that claims to be in place to protect Americans from the sale of dangerous counterfeit drugs. In reality, it’s another industry front group, which in 2019 used at least $900,000 in grants to pay for a series of television commercials aimed at stopping the importation of cheaper prescription drugs from other countries.

The ads featured sheriffs warning people of the “dangers” of importing drugs with “loose foreign safeguards,” and claimed to be paid for by the National Sheriffs’ Association. They falsely gave the impression that law enforcement was widely against the less expensive drug imports but, in reality, the Partnership for Safe Medicines, funded by PhRMA, had given the National Sheriffs’ Association the grants to fund the industry-backed commercials.19

$30 Billion Spent on Medical Marketing

The marketing of prescription drugs, health services, laboratory tests and even disease awareness is big business in the U.S., and spending has been on a steady uphill climb since 1997. That year, spending on medical marketing was $17.7 billion, which rose to $29.9 billion in 2016.20

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) spending increased the most rapidly, from 11.9% of total spending to 32%. DTC prescription drug ads accounted for $6 billion in spending alone in 2016, which amounted to 4.6 million ads, including 663,000 television commercials, mostly for high-cost biologics and cancer immunotherapies.

Disease awareness campaigns, meanwhile, are actually marketing campaigns run by pharmaceutical companies geared at diseases treated by their drugs. Such campaigns rose in numbers from 44 in 1997 to 401 in 2016, with spending increasing from $177 million to $430 million over the same period.

DTC marketing for health services also rose from $542 million to $2.9 billion, with spending increases particularly notable for hospitals, dental centers, cancer centers, mental health and addiction clinics and medical services, such as home health care.21

Aside from DTC advertising, Big Pharma is still marketing directly to health professionals — an area that accounted for the most professional spending, according to a JAMA study on medical marketing in the U.S.22

“Pharmaceutical marketing to health professionals accounted for most spending and remains high even with new policies to limit industry influence,” the researchers, from The Dartmouth Institute’s Center for Medicine in the Media, noted. “Despite the increase in marketing over 20 years, regulatory oversight remains limited.”23

Gates and Wellcome Trust Use WHO to Swindle the World

The Wellcome Trust is a top funder of health research globally and has been a major player in the COVID-19 pandemic, including co-leading a WHO program to develop new COVID-19 therapeutics.24However, the Wellcome Trust25 is part of the technocratic globalist network. Wellcome is the largest charity in the U.K. that funds “innovative biomedical research.” It was formed in 1936 after the death of Sir Henry Wellcome, a pharmaceutical pioneer and progressive industrialist.

Their board consists of present or former bankers, insurance executives and investment board members. Sir Henry Wellcome, while still alive, founded the company that went on to become GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), so the Wellcome Trust is essentially the “philanthropic arm” of GSK.

In a BMJ investigation, journalist Tim Schwab points out that the charity’s Big Pharma investments overlap with its research efforts, such that, “The major funder of health research stands to gain financially from the pandemic, raising questions about transparency and accountability.”26

While leading the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator project to deliver COVID-19 treatment options, Wellcome has invested heavily in the companies making the treatments. This includes $389 million in Novartis, which manufacturers dexamethasone, and $347 million in Roche, which is manufacturing monoclonal antibodies.

“Both Roche and Novartis report having had conversations with WHO’s ACT Accelerator about their therapeutic drugs,” BMJ reported, adding:27

“Wellcome’s financial interests have been published on the trust’s website and through financial regulatory filings but do not seem to have been disclosed as financial conflicts of interest in the context of Wellcome’s work on covid-19, even as they show that the trust is positioned to potentially gain from the pandemic financially.”

Profiting From the Pandemic Response

Wellcome’s director, Jeremy Farrar, also has a position on the U.K.’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, which advises the government on COVID-19, as well as a board seat with the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, which gave $1 billion to COVID-19 vaccine development.

While Farrar has spoken publicly on the benefits of specific COVID-19 drugs, Wellcome is heavily invested in companies manufacturing COVID-19 vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics, and reported gains of $4.5 billion from its investments in 2020, which the BMJ notes is “three times more money than the trust gave away in charity.”28

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is also in line to profit from its role in the pandemic response, as it has more than $250 million invested in COVID-19-related companies. Despite their financial interests in the “solutions” they’re touting, the Gates Foundation and Wellcome have been regarded favorably in the media for their role in pandemic response efforts.

The BMJ quoted Joel Lexchin, Professor Emeritus of York University’s school of health policy and management in Toronto, who stated:29

“What the pandemic is doing is buffing the reputation of organisations like Gates and Wellcome and the drug companies, when I don’t think they really deserve that buffing up.

I think they’re acting the way they always have, which is, from the drug companies’ point of view, looking after their own financial interests, and from the point of view of the foundations is pursuing their own privately developed objectives without being responsible to anybody but their own boards of directors.”

The fact remains that, via their extensive lobbying efforts and marketing, Big Pharma is continuing to grow ever more powerful, as are the foundations connected to them.

______________________

For more:

Category:

Activism, Treatment

1st Report of Deer Ticks Parasitizing a North American Porcupine in Canada

https://www.mdpi.com/2673-6772/1/2/6/htm

First Report of Ixodes scapularis Ticks Parasitizing a North American Porcupine in Canada

by John D. Scott
 
 
Department of Medicine and Epidemiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA
Academic Editor: Theo De Waal
Parasitologia 2021, 1(2), 45-49; https://doi.org/10.3390/parasitologia1020006
Received: 16 February 2021 / Revised: 18 March 2021 / Accepted: 25 March 2021 / Published: 1 April 2021

Abstract

Adult females of the blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae), were collected from a North American porcupine, Erethizon dorsatum, in eastern Ontario, Canada. This porcupine parasitism indicates that an established population of I. scapularis is present in the local vicinity. This tick species is known to parasitize more than 150 different vertebrate hosts, including the North American porcupine. The presence of I. scapularis ticks parasitizing a North American porcupine constitutes a new tick-host record in Canada.

1. Introduction

The North American porcupine, Erethizon dorsatum (Rodentia: Erethizontidae), also known as the Canadian porcupine, is a herbivore rodent. This meso-mammal is one of the largest members in the rodent family, and has wide distribution across continental North America. This woodland denizen is native to coniferous and mixed forests across southern Canada, and its distribution extends southward into northeastern, north-central, and western United States as far south as the northern fringe of Mexico. Ecologically, free-ranging porcupines have a home range of up to 28 ha. This arboreal herbivore is covered with a coat of quills that arm it from predators. Once a porcupine is threatened, it will hide its face, swat its tail at its assailant, and thrust an arsenal of quills in multiple directions to strike its attacker. The sharp, needle-like quills are painful, and prudent attackers retreat. In the spring and summer, porcupines feed on berries, seeds, grasses, leaves, roots, and stems. In the winter, North American porcupines feed on the inner bark of trees. As these herbivore rodents forage for food, they make direct contact with low-lying vegetation where ticks are questing.
Blacklegged ticks, Ixodes scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae), are indigenous across North America east of the Rocky Mountains [1]. Ixodidae, commonly referred to as hard ticks, are predominantly blood-feeding ectoparasites of mammals and birds although several species feed on reptiles [1]. Tiny ticks maintain a stealth presence in the natural environment, and covertly parasitize North American porcupines. These quill-laden rodents are primarily nocturnal, but will defend themselves at any time of day. In Wisconsin, wildlife rehabilitators collected I. scapularis adults from several North American porcupines [2].
 
The locality where the free-ranging porcupine was found is in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence forest region which consists primarily of red pine, eastern white pine, eastern hemlock, yellow birch, sugar maple, and red oak [3]. In a tick-host study conducted across Ontario with veterinarians, wildlife rehabilitators, and the public, acarologists previously detected I. scapularis ticks on domestic dogs, cats, and humans in the same precambrian area (Canadian Shield) [4]. Although porcupines have feeding activities in trees, these spiny rodents will have direct contact with low-lying vegetation when they are feeding at ground level. If present, this is where I. scapularis ticks are questing. Depending on the time of year and their developmental life stage, I. scapularis ticks conduct host-seeking activities anytime through the day. Several blacklegged ticks collected within a single collection period (a single year) indicate that a reproducing population of I. scapularisis present [5,6].

2. Results

The North American porcupine was found on the side of the road north of Westport, Ontario on County Road 10 (44.687° N, 76.385° W), which is situated within the Canadian Shield (Figure 1). The injured porcupine was taken to Sandy Pines Wildlife Centre, Napanee, Ontario, and a wildlife rehabilitator examined it. Since the head had visible trauma, it is believed that the porcupine was struck by a passing vehicle. Based on a x-ray, veterinary technicians also found a diaphramatic hernia. Due to the severity of trauma, the North American porcupine was promptly euthanized upon arrival, and five partially engorged I. scapularisfemales were collected.

3. Discussion

The collection of five engorged I. scapularis females feeding on a North American porcupine is a novel discovery in Canada (Figure 2). Based on a literature search [2,7,8,9] and the Canadian National Collection, the author affirms that this mammalian parasitism is the first documentation of I. scapularis parasitizing a North American porcupine in Canada. (See link for full article)

Category:

research, Ticks

New Lyme Disease Test Distinguishes Between Early and Late-Stage Disease

ihttps://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-04-lyme-disease-distinguishes-early-late-stage

New Lyme disease test distinguishes between early and late-stage disease

April 7, 2021

by Frontiers

Lyme disease

For those who live in an area blighted by ticks, the threat of Lyme disease can cast a shadow over the joy of spring and summer. These blood-sucking arachnids can transmit bacteria into the bloodstream of their unsuspecting host, causing the disease. Early treatment is essential, but current tests are not usually sensitive enough to detect the disease in early-stage patients. A recent study in open-access journal Frontiers in Microbiology reveals a new test for Lyme disease, which is the first to reliably distinguish between early- and late-stage patients. The test detects a genetic sequence left by a virus that resides in Lyme-causing bacteria, and can detect just one bacterial cell in a small blood sample.

As the most common tick-borne infection, Lyme affects nearly 500,000 people in the U.S. every year. Symptoms include fever, fatigue, joint pain, and a distinctive ‘bullseye’ rash, but if left untreated, the disease can cause paralysis and even death. As such, is important, but difficult.

“Early diagnosis of Lyme disease is absolutely vital in reducing suffering, because early Lyme can be treated, but late Lyme is very difficult to treat,” explained Dr. Jinyu Shan of the University of Leicester, lead author on the study. “Current tests cannot typically detect the low numbers of bacteria in early-stage patient blood samples. Our goal was to design a highly sensitive to help doctors to identify Lyme disease as early as possible.” (See link for article)

______________________

Study here: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2021/03/31/targeting-multicopy-prophage-genes-for-the-increased-detection-of-borrelia-burgdorferi-sensu-lato-the-causative-agents-of-lyme-disease-in-blood/

Evidently the test is unique in that it is based on prophages that have a genetic sequence inserted into the bacteria by a virus which can escape the bacteria, and is more likely to be picked up in the blood due to having multiple copies within cells.

They found the test is sensitive and can detect one bacterial cell in .3 mL of blood.  Infected patients have between 1-100 bacterial cells per mL of blood.

The test is the first to distinguish between healthy, early-stage, and late-stage samples.

I must admit that the debacle with PCR testing for COVID has made me extremely skeptical and wary.  I hope that this isn’t too good to be true.  Time will tell.

Category:

Activism, Lyme, research, Testing

Tick-borne Diseases & Coinfection: Current Considerations

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877959X20304775

Tick-borne diseases and co-infection: Current considerations

Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases
Volume 12, Issue 1, January 2021, 101607

Abstract

Over recent years, a multitude of pathogens have been reported to be tick-borne. Given this, it is unsurprising that these might co-exist within the same tick, however our understanding of the interactions of these agents both within the tick and vertebrate host remains poorly defined. Despite the rich diversity of ticks, relatively few regularly feed on humans, 12 belonging to argasid and 20 ixodid species, and literature on co-infection is only available for a few of these species. The interplay of various pathogen combinations upon the vertebrate host and tick vector represents a current knowledge gap. The impact of co-infection in humans further extends into diagnostic challenges arising when multiple pathogens are encountered and we have little current data upon which to make therapeutic recommendations for those with multiple infections. Despite these short-comings, there is now increasing recognition of co-infections and current research efforts are providing valuable insights into dynamics of pathogen interactions whether they facilitate or antagonise each other. Much of this existing data is focussed upon simultaneous infection, however the consequences of sequential infection also need to be addressed. To this end, it is timely to review current understanding and highlight those areas still to address.

Category:

Lyme, research

55% of Brits Have COVID Antibodies, Despite 12 Months of Lockdowns

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-shocking-report-55-of-brits-have-antibodies-despite-12-months-of-restrictions

April 06, 2021

DANIEL HOROWITZ

Originally, we were told that governments can assume unprecedented control over our lives, businesses, and even our own faces for the goal of not overrunning hospitals. A year later, as we come increasingly close to herd immunity, not only are hospitals in no danger of being overrun, but it turns out that people have likely contracted the virus at a rate that would have occurred without any of these restrictions – and their calamitous damage to society. Twelve months later, it’s all pain and no gain. (See link for article)

________________________

**Comment**

Excerpt:

img

This data demonstrates that the entire 12-month premise of lockdowns and masks to slow the spread was a lie (after the original lie of flatten the curve), and even more so, any continuation of these policies after most people have immunity is built upon a dastardly lie. Even if the new goal has changed illogically from decreasing the burden on the hospitals to slowing the growth of cases, it’s quite evident that these measures don’t work. We have now achieved well over 50% immunity between infection and vaccines in most Western countries, built on 12 months of masochist public policy designed to preclude that immunity.

Horowitz points out that this intel comes at a time when public ‘authorities‘ are pushing the myth of super deadly and contagious variants, yet Britain has barely had any cases.

The intel also falls in line with what others are saying.

Yet, dissenting doctors continue to be censored and people are losing jobs for not forcing and adhering to these nonsensical measures that have been proven time and again not to work.  In this bizarre world of “make-believe,” you can now purchase a combination phone/mask.

Track coach Brad Keyes put it succinctly:

“I’ll come straight to the point,” he said. “I will not put kids on the track and tell them to run any races while wearing masks.”

Brutally honest in his message to Vezina, Keyes said the athletic directors and school boards that followed New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Association recommendations and agreed to outdoor mask-wearing were being dishonest to the athletes, by making decisions without wisdom or science.

“No, the real reason I won’t do it is because it’s senseless, irrational, cowardice b——t and I will not help cover that up,” Keyes wrote. “I will not stand up in front of the kids and lie to them and tell them that these masks are doing anything worthwhile out in an open field with wind blowing and the sun shining.”

“Fire me if you must,” was the title of his follow up message. On Monday, his school bosses did just that.  Source

Meanwhile, Fauci falters to explain the downward trend in Texas, where 80% have reached herd immunity without the COVID injection. Perhaps he’s waiting to include more cases after people getting the injection test positive for the virus.  It’s a win/win for continuing the fear-mongering.

Even mainstream media has to admit:

  • An official of the European Medicines Agency said he believes there is a link between the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine and blood clots. (Barron’s)

  • Oxford University has stopped a trial of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine in teenagers and children due to concerns over blood clotting. (Wall Street Journal)

  • 246 fully-vaccinated Michigan residents later tested positive for COVID-19; 11 required hospitalization and three of them died. (Detroit News)
  • The Baltimore manufacturing plant that recently had to discard 15 million doses of Johnson & Johnson’s coronavirus vaccine had a history of flouting the rules. (New York Times)
Before you agree to the jab, please read about the many adverse reactions and deaths.

Also, Please see 12 Vaccine Truths put out by the Disinformation Dozen.

A UK organization labeled as the “Center for Countering Digital Hate” produced a report that stated that 65% of all vaccine misinformation comes from a set of 12 people, and put forth a call to big tech platforms to censor their content and erase them completely from their platforms. They labeled this group the “Disinformation Dozen,” and the message has been pushed out to news sources around the world.

Category:

Activism, Treatment, vaccines, Viruses