Do cell phones cause psychiatric illness?

Do cell phones cause psychiatric illness? This psychotherapist thinks so - and wrote about it. Read at Scribd - decide for yourself.
Link

From http://www.livinghealthiernow.com/page_4.html



About Stephen King's sci-fi novel CELL

The Game: Anatomy of the White House - PhRMA Deal

http://youtu.be/ta_FOY_9ZR8

Ontario taxpayers pay out $1.1 billion in decade reimbursing doctors for malpractice fees

http://www.thespec.com/opinion/article/101710--right-to-know-doctors-deal

Right to know doctors' deal

THE HAMILTON SPECTATOR

(Feb 10, 2009)

For many professionals, insurance is one of the costs of doing business. That holds true for the province's doctors.

Where doctors differ, though, is that most of the cost of their insurance is picked up by the taxpayers.

As The Spectator revealed Saturday, Ontario taxpayers have spent $1.1 billion in the past decade reimbursing doctors for most of the cost of their malpractice fees. Last year, it amounted to about $112 million.

The doctors themselves paid $24 million collectively. That means we -- the taxpayers, the patients -- covered about 83 per cent of the cost of malpractice insurance.

There is an argument to be made that this makes sense. Doctors' incomes are restricted by the province, so it's logical that the province, using taxpayers' money, would cover at least part of the cost of insurance. Doctors are essentially employees of the province, although they would likely argue strenuously against that kind of definition. No doctor would practise without malpractice insurance; if we want people to become doctors, it's reasonable for the employer -- that's us -- to pay some of their insurance fees. It becomes a recruitment tool as well, which takes on more importance, given the shortages of doctors in many Ontario municipalities.

But the situation is also an outrage. These are, by and large, high-income earners who have a sweetheart deal with the province. And that's not only because they don't have to pay the bulk of their sometimes substantial insurance premiums. If they do face a lawsuit, their insurance covers representation by high-powered attorneys who seem averse to coming to reasonable settlements and prefer to draw out the legal proceedings as long as possible. And who pays for that? We do.

At the same time, those who take doctors to court over alleged malpractice are left to finance their own fight as best they can. In effect, the provincial government is funding one side of a legal battle, but not the other. The playing field is anything but level.

This situation raises many troubling questions. Is it possible that some doctors might not be as careful as they should be because this arrangement provides a safety net for them? Is it possible that some doctors might not take the outcomes of legal proceedings as seriously as they should because there is virtually no impact on their income streams? Does it make them less accountable to legal decisions?

The only reason we know anything about this at all is that a divisional court panel ordered the release late last year of details of this agreement between the provincial Health Ministry, the Ontario Medical Association and the Canadian Medical Protective Association. The court ruling came after a Freedom of Information request.

It is absolutely reasonable that those who foot the bills -- that would be us -- have a right to this information. And we should be able to exercise that right without being forced to go to court. At the very least, we should be able to expect some public accountability, perhaps through the Ontario ombudsman's office. After all, it is our money.

How the west won mental health thinking

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/apr/05/west-foisting-mental-health-doctrines-world

"The way the west reacts to natural disasters such as the tsunami of 2004 and latterly the Japanese earthquake – namely by parachuting in counsellors and "trauma experts" into disaster zones to offer psychological first aid – is just one highly visible illustration of the growing dominance of western mental health orthodoxy, Watters argues. What if a group of shamans had turned up in Manhattan knocking on doors in the wake of 9/11 offering to counsel traumatised survivors, he asks. Is that the cultural equivalent to dispatching British and American counsellors who "don't speak the language and don't understand the culture" they are trying to help?"

Indeed. 

Pfizer: No More Free Lunch in Sandwich

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/mar/23/budget-2011-sandwich-pfizer-jobs

The residents of Sandwich, where the pharmaceutical company Pfizer is soon to close its research and development facility – with a loss of 2,400 jobs – will be watching to see how that pledge materialises over the next few months. Viagra was made, created, designed and invented here; new drugs will not be.

Iodine for Health: Some Resources

Could iodine be part of the solution  to your health problems?

Iodine

View more presentations from MedicineAndHealth14

The miracles of iodine
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2006/03/13/the_miracle_of_iodine_and_its_nearly_free.htm

Consequences of iodine deficiency
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2007/01/31/consequences_of_iodine_deficiency.htm

World Health Organization http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/idd/en/

Lugol's Iodine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lugol's_iodine

Townsend Letter - http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0ISW/is_279/ai_n16865318/

...to be continued

Bonkers: Sell Eli Lilly stock now

Coming in 2011: The end of Eli Lilly as we know it.
Urgent message to Lilly shareholders: Sell now.


"No country can afford not to have periodic showcase prosecutions of serious corporate abuses to foster deterrence.
          – John Braithwaite, Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical Industry (Routledge, 1984)

To prepare for the drama that's about to unfold, here's a little history.

On Jan. 30, 2009, Eli Lilly and Company pleaded guilty to a violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). The Court sentenced Lilly to pay a criminal fine of $515 million and asset forfeiture of $100 million, the largest criminal fine imposed against an individual defendant in the history of the United States.

The Government believed this historic criminal fine reflected the seriousness of the offense and Eli Lilly's earlier violations of the FDCA. The Government believed the criminal fine would promote respect for the law, and that the sentence would deter Eli Lilly from further unlawful promotion of its pharmaceutical products. The Government believed a criminal fine of this magnitude would serve as general deterrence to others who might be tempted to go down the road of off-label marketing.

Under the Corporate Integrity Agreement (CIA) between Lilly and the U S. Department of Health and Human Services, the parties agreed that Eli Lilly would not be placed on probation. However, the agreement imposed a strict compliance program to ensure that Lilly's criminal conduct would not recur.

Eli Lilly is subject to exclusion from Federal Health Care programs, including but not limited to Medicaid, for a material breach of the CIA. A material breach includes failure by Lilly to report a reportable event and take corrective action. A reportable event means anything that involves a matter that a reasonable person would consider a probable violation of criminal, civil, or administrative laws applicable to any Federal Health Care program and/or applicable to any FDA requirements relating to the promotion of Lilly products.

The CIA applies to Eli Lilly employees and all contractors, subcontractors, agents and other persons who perform promotional and product services on behalf of Lilly.   Exclusion will have national effect and apply to all other Federal procurement and nonprocurement programs.

Shareholder lawsuits filed against the company for engaging in a long list of illegal activities were settled in March 2010, with Lilly agreeing to abide by strict new measures guaranteeing that matters affecting patient safety and benefit shall be of paramount importance. 

That's the background story, in a nutshell. Future WikiLeaks to follow.
For details regarding the precise nature of the substance that will soon be hitting the fan, watch this space"....
http://www.bonkersinstitute.org/goodbyelilly.html




We hope Lilly stockholders get the bath they need.


Thanks and a tip of the Mad Hatter's Hat to 
The Bonkers Institute - http://bonkerstinstitute.org