The smear campaign's major contributors were The Week, Time Magazine, The New York Times and England's The Guardian. Here's the title from The Week: "How the vitamin industrial complex swindled America: Blame money, politics, and a flawed genius named Linus Pauling."
This title is very interesting. Using the phrase "vitamin industrial complex" with money and politics is an example of "psychological projection," accusing others with what they're actually guilty of, or attacking others who are innocent of what the attackers actually practice.
It's Big Pharma and the medical monopoly with support from the FDA and bought politicians who have the largest medical-industrial complex going. The smear campaign hit pieces cite a 12 billion-dollar supplement industry without statistical sourcing. But what is the revenue from combined medical monopoly efforts?
Investigative journalist Maggie Mahar wrote a book titled Money Driven Medicine, which is described as a look behind the scenes of America's 2 trillion-dollar medical-industrial complex. So, how many billions make a trillion?
It takes 1,000 billions to make an American trillion. The vitamin hit pieces neglected to compare a 12 billion-dollar vitamin industry, if that figure is accurate, to the 2,000 billion-dollar medical system that doesn't want diseases prevented, because disease care is their business.
PBS journalist Bill Moyer presents a documentary of the same name based on Maggie's discoveries here (http://www.pbs.org).
Crazy statements from crazy people that the MSM honorDr. Paul Offit is quoted liberally by these articles involved in the smear campaign against Linus Pauling and vitamins. Remember Offit? He's the one who publicly asserted that a newborn could tolerate 1,000, (reduced from 10,000), vaccinations in the same time frame while the mainstream prestitutes simply jotted down and reported that claim, as they do with his accusations of money and politics behind the demand for vitamins.
The absurdly outspoken Offit has had a vested interest with his part in developing the pediatric rotavirus vaccines, one of which had to be withdrawn because it was turning babies' guts inside out.
And he has been endowed generously by Merck, adding to his vaccine patent royalties, for speaking engagements and appearances on behalf of the vaccine industry, all adding to millions for Paul.
Here's an interesting, outrageous exchange with Offit reported by Age of Autism some years ago (http://www.ageofautism.com).
Offit has also been accurately accused of fraudulently hiding pharmaceutical financial ties while he falsely accused Dr. Andrew Wakefield of the same thing. Projection again.
Offit is not a clean character, and he constantly projects his dirty work and financial motives onto others who have integrity, courage and compassion for children and humanity (http://www.mecfsassist.org).
But his anti-supplement tirades are quoted without question by the MSM, as you can see in the articles sourced below.
Attacking Linus Pauling
This has been going on for years now from various sectors of the medical mafia using the lamestream media platform. Here's a current example written by Offit: "a man [Pauling] who was so spectacularly right that he won two Nobel prizes and so spectacularly wrong that he was arguably the world's greatest quack."
Pauling had some books published, and he worked as a professor of chemistry, but he never had a direct vested financial interest in the vitamin industry the way Offit has with the vaccine industry. And he never recommended having infants receive 1,000 vaccinations at once, nor did he recommend pediatricians not care for children whose parents refused vaccinations. But the flawed Dr. Offit has done just that.
Offit is so outrageous and public that he is the perfect principle attack dog for Big Pharma against the supplement industry, which threatens their disease care racket. And the MSM swallows and regurgitates everything he asserts without question. That's balanced journalism?
Other factoids gleaned from this smear campaign:
Dr. Edgar Miller and a couple of his colleagues were featured in the hit pieces because they wrote editorial opinions that were recorded in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine where they urged people to stop wasting money on multivitamins that caused more harm than good. More projection.
Three unfavorable supplement studies were offered to support their editorial opinions, three out of easily over 1,000 that have been favorable. If you've read Natural News even occasionally, you will have seen some of those cited. If not, go here (http://science.naturalnews.com/).
Another Time article commented, "The possibility of harm caused by natural products sold in health food stores isn't theoretical." Yet here's a conclusion from a study linked in that same article: Patients who are taking a daily multivitamin should understand that doing so may not help prevent dementia; however, they may experience other health benefits previously demonstrated in this trial.
That's supposed to warn folks away from multivitamins? Of course, the close to 800,000 annual deaths linked to iatrogenic causes (from medical interventions), including the correctly prescribed pharmaceuticals' annual death rate of over 100,000, are ignored once again.
Those statistics are from Dr. Carolyn Dean's book Death by Modern Medicine, which doesn't include iatrogenic disability, disease or worsened health, or over-the-counter drugs' adverse reactions.
Supplement death toll in 2009 was zero, zip, nada, as reported by Mike Adams with sources in 2010
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/043306_multivitamins_mainstream_media_nutritional_supplements.html#ixzz2oiWiBgzL