top of page

Trojan Horse Journals, Medical Education and Scientific Policy: The Nearly Imperceptible Intermixing of High-Quality Science with Propaganda, Lies, and Unethical Inertia

Dr Alex Vasquez, article-in-progress last updated 12 July 2017

12 July 2017 from New England Journal of Medicine's Journal Watch:

"Two large studies find an inverse association between coffee consumption and mortality, but recommending more of the stuff "would be premature," according to an editorial in the Annals of Internal Medicine: "Two large studies find an inverse association between coffee consumption and mortality, but recommending more of the stuff "would be premature," according to an editorial in the Annals of Internal Medicine. The EPIC study followed over a half-million subjects in 10 European countries for an average of 16 years. It found that those in the highest quartile of consumption had significantly lower all-cause mortality than nonconsumers after adjustment for smoking and other covariates. The Multiethnic Cohort study followed some 200,000 Hawaiians and Californians, also for an average of 16 years. As with EPIC, higher consumption was associated with lower all-cause mortality after adjustment. The effect was seen across all ethnic groups, Native Hawaiians excepted." http://jwat.ch/2tHtPKo 

 

Commentary by Dr Vasquez: Two massive studies with more than 700,000 participants (enormous study group considering that many clinical trials have as few as 40 and often a few hundred or a couple of thousand subjects at best) followed for 16 years (very long follow-up; most trials only have 3-6 months of follow-up) report benefit of coffee-drinking on all-cause mortality, and yet the mainstream medical authorities New England Journal of Medicine and Annals of Internal Medicine decree that "recommending more of the stuff would be premature." So we as doctors are told to not recommend coffee because "more research is needed", but at the same time we're forced to deliver and receive vaccines that have not been proven safe nor effective any clinical trial. I'm quite interested in the curious paradox of the medical profession's caution on certain things such as diet and nutrition contrasted with its drunken embrace of every new drug and vaccine that comes on the market. Look at Vioxx – the published data no later than 2001 published in JAMA (2001 Aug, 954-9) was very clear that the drug increased mortality yet we as a medical profession still used millions of dollars worth of this drug and c