The-medical-industrial-complex strikes again. Is there no end to the reckless incompetence of these arrogant bloviating-nincompoops?
Scandal: MRI Brain-Imaging Completely Unreliable
Fake news on a grand scale.
By Jon Rappoport
Over the years, I’ve exposed a number of medical diagnostic tests. For example, the antibody test was once taken as a sign of good health when it registered positive, but then it was turned upside down—a positive result was read as a signal of illness.
Now we have the vaunted MRI brain-imaging system.
From sciencealert.com (7/6/16): “There could be a very serious problem with the past 15 years of research into human brain activity, with a new study suggesting that a bug in fMRI software could invalidate the results of some 40,000 papers.”
“That’s massive, because functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is one of the best tools we have to measure brain activity, and if it’s flawed, it means all those conclusions about what our brains look like during things like exercise, gaming, love, and drug addiction are wrong.”
“It’s fascinating stuff, but the fact is that when scientists are interpreting data from an fMRI machine, they’re not looking at the actual brain. As Richard Chirgwin reports for The Register, what they’re looking at is an image of the brain divided into tiny ‘voxels’, then interpreted by a computer program.”
“’Software, rather than humans … scans the voxels looking for clusters’, says Chirgwin. ‘When you see a claim that “Scientists know when you’re about to move an arm: these images prove it,” they’re interpreting what they’re told by the statistical software’.”
“To test how good this software actually is, Eklund and his team gathered resting-state fMRI data from 499 healthy people sourced from databases around the world, split them up into groups of 20, and measured them against each other to get 3 million random comparisons.”
“They tested the three most popular fMRI software packages for fMRI analysis – SPM, FSL, and AFNI – and while they shouldn’t have found much difference across the groups, the software resulted in false-positive rates of up to 70 percent.”
“And that’s a problem, because as Kate Lunau at Motherboard points out, not only did the team expect to see an average false positive rate of just 5 percent, it also suggests that some results were so inaccurate, they could be indicating brain activity where there was none.”
“’These results question the validity of some 40,000 fMRI studies and may have a large impact on the interpretation of neuroimaging results’, the team writes in PNAS [Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences].”
“The bad news here is that one of the bugs the team identified has been in the system for the past 15 years, which explains why so many papers could now be affected.”
“The bug was corrected in May 2015, at the time the researchers started writing up their paper, but the fact that it remained undetected for over a decade shows just how easy it was for something like this to happen, because researchers just haven’t had reliable methods for validating fMRI results.”
40,000 scientific papers invalidated. And from what I gather, not everyone is sure all the problems with MRI have been corrected.
Think about the bloviating—“We now know what the brain is doing when people are running and sleeping and eating…” No reason to have believed any of this.
And then there is Obama’s so called Brain Initiative, a program kicked off and funded after the Sandy Hook School catastrophe. At least some of the scientific work has been relying on MRI imagining. How much of that work needs to be thrown out?
In case you think invalidating 40,000 research papers isn’t a gigantic scandal, consider how many times these worthless papers have been cited as evidence in other studies. The ripple effect creates a tsunami of lies.
And for each one of those lies, there has been a researcher who, quite sure of himself and his reputation, made statements to the press and colleagues and students, promoting his findings.
Fake news? Now here is awesome fake news.
Consider this more than troubling (and damning) evidence the next time you, or your child, is about to swallow or be injected with a Pig Pharma product, which has been prescribed (pushed) by your ‘physician’:
Swallow Glass and Paint With Your Medicine, It’s Good For You
By Jon Rappoport
Medical-drug contamination. It’s not a great advertisement for manufacturers. And then there are the patients…
From FiercePharma (7/20/16): “The handwriting was on the wall for a GlaxoSmithKline ($GSK) API [Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient] operation in the U.K. when the drugmaker recalled more than 425,000 Bactroban antibiotic products last fall after an FDA inspection. Now the extent of the problems at the facility have been laid out in a stern agency warning letter that cited it for penicillin cross-contamination, a problem that can lead to fatal drug reactions, as well as microbial contamination.”
(My comment: Fatal, as in death.)
“The FDA said it uncovered 187 instances of penicillin in nonpenicillin manufacturing areas in 3 1/2 years, and that GSK has still not updated its cleaning validation plan.”
(My comment: In those 3 ½ years, who knows how many doses of lethally contaminated drugs GSK put out to pharmacies and patients? And even after that time period, GSK was still manufacturing in a contaminated environment.)
“’Contamination of non-beta-lactam drugs with beta-lactam drugs presents great risks to patient safety, including anaphylaxis and death. No safe level of penicillin contamination has been determined to be a tolerable risk’,” the FDA warning letter points out.”
“But cross-contamination is not the only issue the FDA uncovered at the plant. The warning letter says that the plant has had ongoing issues with microbial contamination in the water used to make APIs. It said there had been 25 instances of breaches of the alert level in the 9 months between April 20, 2014 and Feb. 17, 2015.”
(My comment: How many breaches does it take before GSK wakes up? Or, does the company want to wake up?)
“Further, the inspectors said that in one API batch, GSK found green fibers that were probably from scouring pads, red flakes that might have been painted in the manufacturing plant and black particulates that were consistent with glass particles. While the GSK decided they were ‘acceptable intrinsic’ contaminates, the FDA was not satisfied…”
—end of FiercePharma excerpt—
GSK was saying that, ho-hum, green fibers, red paint flecks, and glass were just part of the day-to-day drug manufacturing process, and posed no problem. Well, not a problem for GSK. For consumers? That would obviously be a quite different story.
For people who are worried about the contents of vaccines, it’s also the drugs.
Here’s an historical note on vaccines. The history of contamination goes as far back as you want to reach:
“In this incident (Kyoto, Japan, 1948) – the most serious of its kind – a toxic batch of alum-precipitated toxoid (APT) was responsible for illness in over 600 infants and for no fewer than 68 deaths.”
“”On 20 and 22 October, 1948, a large number of babies and children in the city of Kyoto received their first injection of APT. On the 4th and 5th of November, 15,561 babies and children aged some months to 13 years received their second dose. One to two days later, 606 of those who had been injected fell ill. Of these, 9 died of acute diphtheritic paralysis in seven to fourteen days, and 59 of late paralysis mainly in four to seven weeks.” (Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization, Athone Press, University of London, 1967.)
Here’s another one: “Accidents may, however, follow the use of this so-called killed (rabies) vaccine owing to inadequate processing. A very serious occurrence of this sort occurred at Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, in 1960. No fewer than 18 out of 66 persons vaccinated with Fermi’s carbolized (rabies) vaccine suffered from encephalomyelitis and every one of the eighteen died.” (Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.)
Contamination. Just part of the cost of doing business.
Actually, it lowers the cost of doing business.
As long as the devastating effects on actual people aren’t factored in.