|
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
by author Steve Ransom "Do not let either the medical authorities or the politicians mislead you. Find out what the facts are, and make your own decisions about how to live a happy life and how to live in a better world." High doses of vitamin C could increase the risk of cancer, scientists warn today. So began the June 15, 2001, United Kingdom Daily Mail front-page report outlining the work of Dr Ian Blair, resident researcher at the University of Pennsylvania Pharmacology Unit. The Mail headline appears to be in direct conflict with Dr Blair’s own statement: "Absolutely, for God’s sake, don’t say vitamin C causes cancer." But of course, the Mail and others have shamelessly done exactly that. To the less discerning reader, the story raises worrisome questions as to the wisdom of high-level vitamin C supplementation. Dr Blair postulates that high consumption of vitamin C (a most beneficial adjunct in non-toxic cancer recovery treatment) might actually cause human tissue degeneration, which in turn could lead to a heightened risk of contracting cancer. And here is a golden rule: when it comes to assessing the veracity of any scientific claim, we must always read between the lines--we must search for what the report does not say. We must especially be on the lookout for that hoary old chestnut, otherwise known as "vested interests." A 1994 University of Manchester research methodology handbook contains the following valuable advice: "Science and research must be studied in the context of all interested parties involved. The questions centre on determining the relative weight of the various allies in the ‘fact-creating’ process, e.g., funding bodies, businesses, departments of state, professions and other scientists. In analyzing scientific debates, one should always ask what social, institutional, political and philosophical interests lie behind often apparently ‘neutral’ and ‘technical’ knowledge claims." On the matter of the "fact creation" process, renowned author John Le Carre recently stated: "Big Pharma (the industry in general) is engaged in the deliberate seduction of the medical profession, country by country, worldwide. It is spending a fortune on influencing, hiring and purchasing academic judgment to a point where, in a few years’ time, if Big Pharma continues unchecked on its present happy path, unbought medical opinion will be hard to find" (The Nation, New York, Interview, April 9, 2001). With that in mind, let’s put Dr Blair’s University of Pennsylvania under the spotlight and see what encouragement Dr Blair might have had in taking his extraordinary position and apparently misquoted position against vitamin C. We must ask: what Big Pharma influences might be supporting the University of Pennsylvania Cancer Center (UPCC) and its mother-ship, the University of Pennsylvania Health Service (UPHS)? In May 2000, Dr Ian Blair’s employers at UPCC received a $26 million, five-year Core Grant from the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-the largest and most influential conventional cancer institution in the world. In fact, UPCC has been continuously funded by the NCI Core Grant mechanism since the grant was created by the National Cancer Act in the early 1980s. Currently, the UPCC is awash with more than $100 million in cancer research funding; $37 million is from the NCI; $43 million from closely affiliated organizations, such as the National Institutes of Health, the organization which actually funded Dr Blair’s vitamin C research; another $12 million from foundational support such as the American Cancer Society and the Leukemia Society; and between $8 and $10 million from various pharmaceutical companies. Earlier, in June of 1999, the UPCC received a $4.5 million gift from the William H. Gates Foundation to research conventional treatments for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
Steve Ransom is head of Campaign for Truth in Medicine, a British group that recognizes the right to freedom of choice in health treatment and is committed to the distribution of accurate health and treatment information from properly researched sources. Visit them online at campaignfortruth.com Source: alive #228, October 2001 |
||||||||||