Connect with us

Health & Society

The World Health Organization allows experimental drugs to be used

Published

on

the-world-health-organization-allows-experimental-drugs-to-be-used

From time to time one has breakfast with some international news published by journalistic media of all kinds, of those that catch one’s attention. In some cases I usually read them and put them aside, and in others they simply become part of my archive of forgotten papers, a sort of newspaper pages forgotten in boxes, which from time to time pass to a better life. They collect dust, take up space and with the passing of the years they raise some comments among the people around you: …surely if a psychologist saw your work room, he would not hesitate to diagnose you with Diogenes Syndrome, I have even heard that from friends and family. Surely this Diogenes kept so many things that he got out of control. This is not my case.

Of course, from time to time, in my personal search for more space, I attack those boxes, press containers and many of them, after a discreet review, go to occupy the place that history gives them in the paper container. However, on other occasions some already forgotten headline comes back to remind me again why I kept it. In this case the headline to a column in the newspaper El País of August 13, 2014 (10 years ago) The WHO (World Health Organization) admits the use of experimental drugs. Shielding themselves behind the approval of an ethical committee belonging to the same organization (Juan Palomo, yo me lo guiso, yo me lo como – typical Spanish saying, meaning that one does everything without permisions of anybodyelse) they approved at that time the use of experimental treatments on the victims of an Ebola outbreak that was occurring at that time in West Africa, without having proven their efficacy at all. To justify this treatment, the then WHO Deputy Director of Health Systems argued that other previous treatments were not working and that therefore … it is not only ethical, but a moral imperative.

The WHO statement did not refer, according to the clipping itself, to the experimental serum that had been approved for use in human guinea pigs, but that certain ethical criteria should also be taken into account, including transparency about the nature of the drug (What transparency can there be, when the nature of its results is not known? Ah! These doctors). Of course there was also an emphasis on respect for the individual, dignity and community involvement and, I forgot, consent. Although if you live in West Africa, one of the most depressed areas of the world, where you have absolutely nothing to survive on, whatever those in control of the “medical shaman” shack tell you will be fine with them. What is the difference between dying of Ebola, malnutrition or any other disease for which you are not prepared or serving as a lab rat for the big pharmaceutical corporations, including the phony health guard empire misnamed WHO?

Furthermore, in the same clipping it was confirmed that the WHO had given the go-ahead on the use of certain experimental drugs on those humans in Africa, after a spokesman, a week earlier had advised against the use of any product …that has not gone through the normal process of licensing and medical testing.

Of course I am not going to go into this subject in depth here, but go ahead and say that a book could be written on the subject. If you have the time and opportunity I advise you to put the phrase that serves as the headline of this opinion article: WHO allows experimental drugs to be used, whatever your language, and you will see how thousands of entries on this subject will come up. The COVID 19 pandemic itself, which was not a pandemic and did not plunge the world into a terrifying end of times, was undoubtedly one of the last projects of the WHO and some big pharmaceutical companies on how to use experimental drugs on humans, with the difference that on this occasion they were used on those who could pay for them, enriching the industry in a shameful and disgusting way. Governments lied to us, some presidents even spoke openly of non-existent expert committees (as in the case of Spain), they spoke of transparency and ethics, they used us by calling us stupid and pointing the finger at us if we did not agree with their theses. All limits were exceeded. They hijacked democracy and freedom and subjected us to unnecessary stress from which we emerged, to later define us in general as mentally ill.

Someday I imagine that the truth will have to be brought to light or at least continue to publish material where we can read between the lines of how we were swindled, with the connivance of the WHO, which as on previous occasions, a week before declaring the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, declared that absolutely nothing was going to happen.

What can happen in a week for such a radical change of opinion, and even more so in an organization that, supposedly, has the obligation to watch over all of us?

Sometimes the cuts, although full of dust, are often useful to give us back a minimum of the personal integrity that was taken away from us for a couple of years and that still has not been given back to us, when we now know that there were vaccines that have generated serious health problems and some deaths. Yes, for the greater good. I expect, of course, millions of dollars in compensation to those who have been left with lifelong sequelae or to the relatives of those whose lives have been taken.

By the way, I leave the question up in the air: why in 2014 did we not already have a vaccine against Ebola? A presumed vaccine was patented in 2019, rVSV-ZEBOV, in the USA, if we consider that the disease was detected in 1976 in the Democratic Republic of Congo, why did it take 43 years to obtain results?

Author

Health & Society

EU treading Dangerous Waters: The Perils of Psychedelics in Therapeutic Use

Published

on

The European Commission is getting ready to review citizens’ proposals and one controversial idea on the table is the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative that supports the exploration and implementation of psychedelic treatments for mental wellbeing issues. Advocates of this initiative highlight the advantages of using psychedelics in addressing mental health concerns; however it’s crucial to carefully assess the consequences of making these substances mainstream for therapeutic use, it already happened with way too many “pharma products” and end up being dangerous street drugs, as this is what they actually were from the beginning.

The Illusory Promise of Psychedelics

Supporters of this “therapies” frequently promote these substances as amazing remedies for profound mental health challenges like depression and anxiety disorders such as PTSD are regularly highlighted by them in support of their claims. However, these early research findings are willfully misinterpreted and exaggerated. The “positive outcomes” observed in limited research studies do not automatically translate to safety and effectiveness across wider and more varied demographic groups, often the contrary. Throughout history the fascination with a quick fix for mental health issues has often resulted in disappointment and harm, if not death.

A Lack of Comprehensive Understanding

The insufficient scientific knowledge about psychedelics raises concerns within the community as the intricate workings of the human brain remain a mystery when influenced by these substances. There are risks such as psychological distress and worsening of preexisting mental health conditions that make it unthinkable to integrate psychedelics into mainstream therapy practices at all. It is crucial to acknowledge the variations in individual experiences and biological compositions to prevent unintended harm rather than aiding in treatment efforts.

Regulatory and Ethical Concerns

The push for government endorsement of psychedelic therapies raises numerous ethical questions. Should substances with known psychoactive properties be part of mainstream health care? The regulatory environment surrounding these compounds is fraught with challenges, including ensuring quality control, standardizing dosages, and preventing misuse. With the legalization movements in various regions, the potential for recreational abuse expands, risking public health and safety.

Historical Context and Social Implications

Looking back, the late 1960s and early 1970s were marked by a psychedelic counterculture that resulted in societal turmoil and increased drug abuse. The legacy of this era still looms large; many young individuals romanticize psychedelic use without regarding the severe consequences that accompanied its earlier popularity, including addiction, mental health crises, and a societal disregard for safety protocols.

A Dangerous Precedent

By calling for a more prominent role for psychedelics in treatment protocols, the advocates of the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative may unintentionally set a dangerous precedent. Replacing established, evidence-based treatments with unproven psychedelic therapies could detract from the very real progress made in mental health care. It could shift focus away from holistic approaches that consider lifestyle, therapeutic counseling, and medication tailored to individual needs.

Conclusion

The debate surrounding the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative should prompt a vigilant and cautious examination of the implications of endorsing psychedelics as treatment options. While there is a critical need for innovative approaches in mental health care, rushing to embrace unproven therapies poses significant risks. It is paramount that we prioritize rigorous scientific scrutiny, ethical considerations, and the well-being of individuals over the allure of quick solutions. The only clear path forward is one grounded in proven therapies, comprehensive research, and unwavering commitment to public health.

Author

Continue Reading

Health & Society

Why chocolate should not be given to dogs

Published

on

Chocolate is a favorite delicacy for people, but for cats and dogs it is a real poison, writes the magazine ” Sciences et Avenir” and explains why pets should not be “pampered” with chocolate under any circumstances.

For them, chocolate is toxic, because it is not properly absorbed by their body. This is due to the alkaloid theobromine, which is contained in cocoa and therefore in chocolate.

The substance becomes dangerous to health when large amounts of it are stored in the liver. About 12 grams of theobromine are contained in dark chocolate, twice as much in milk chocolate, and very small amounts in white chocolate.

Theobromine does not harm humans, as the human body manages to break it down quickly.

However, it takes 20 hours for dogs to get rid of this molecule. It can build up in their liver and cause poisoning if large amounts of chocolate are ingested at once.

Among the symptoms are vomiting, diarrhea, rapid pulse, convulsions.

The same is true for cats. However, they are less attracted to chocolate than dogs because they cannot taste sweets with their tongues, although there are exceptions.

In addition, pet obesity is the subject of a number of educational campaigns aimed at owners.

A court in North West England has banned a British man from keeping pets for the next 10 years because his Dalmatian became too fat. wrote the English tabloid “Sun” in November 2009.

40-year-old man John Green, a resident of Macclesfield in Cheshire, showed extreme irresponsibility towards his dog Barney and fed him chips and chocolate.

Thus, in just three months, it became several times fatter than normal for its breed and reached 70 kg.

Green was tipped off by alarmed, vigilant fellow citizens.

Animal control officials warned Green that his dog’s health was in danger and recommended that he be put on a diet.

However, he did not follow the recommendations and the dog continued to gain weight.

The Dalmatian was eventually removed from his owner’s home in June and put on a diet in a private kennel, where staff made sure he got enough exercise.

As a result, Barney, who is eight years old, lost 40 kg.

Green pleaded guilty to causing his dog unnecessary suffering, but the court found some mitigating circumstances because the man treated Barney more like a friend than a dog and did not realize he was harming him.

That’s why Green was only sentenced to 200 hours of community service and to pay £780 in costs.

Illustrative Photo by Glenn: https://www.pexels.com/photo/high-angle-photo-of-a-corgi-looking-upwards-2664417/

Author

Continue Reading

Health & Society

Russian Orthodox Church calls on mass culture to abandon ‘images promoting alcoholism’

Published

on

On the occasion of the Day of Sobriety celebrated in the country today, the Russian Orthodox Church called on mass culture not to promote alcoholism, TASS reported.

The agency recalls that the All-Russian Day of Sobriety is celebrated on the initiative of the Russian Orthodox Church on September 11 to remind people of the harm caused by alcohol. On this day, in some parts of Russia, the sale of alcohol is limited or completely prohibited.

“The culture of attitude towards this is very important. There are many “nice jokes” about alcoholism in our everyday culture. There is nothing good about that. We know what the state of intoxication leads to. Those who deal with mass culture should make an effort that the image of the “dear drunkard” should still leave our mass culture,” said the head of the synodal department of the Moscow Patriarchate for Church Interaction on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg Forum of United Cultures with society and media Vladimir Legoida.

Asked whether it would be appropriate to ban or restrict the sale of alcohol across the country, he said “that would be wonderful”. “But it is important that people do this consciously, independently, not because someone is forcing them, and also that there is, as it is customary to say, a public consensus,” he stated.

Legoida noted that the category of “sobriety” is important for the church in general, which refers not only to abstinence from alcohol.

Meanwhile, during a press conference dedicated to the All-Russian Day of Sobriety, Russia’s Deputy Health Minister Oleg Salagai said that alcohol abuse can reduce a man’s life expectancy by six years and a woman by five years.

“The systemic measures that were adopted allowed us to really reduce alcohol consumption. Today, it can be confidently said that Russia is not one of the most drinking countries in the world,” said the deputy minister, who pointed out that in 2023 alcohol consumption in the country was about 8.4 liters per person, while at the beginning of the century the indicator was in double digits.

Illustrative Photo by EVG Kowalievska: https://www.pexels.com/photo/selective-focus-photography-of-assorted-brand-liquor-bottles-1128259/

Author

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2023 EuroTimes

Exit mobile version