I think there are a lot of different scandals lurking. I had only heard of the fact that the evidence against saturated fat and salt is weak/non-existent after I had had trouble with statins. This lead me to places where a whole set of medical scandals seem to be brewing - discussed by doctors and medical researchers.
1) People with high blood cholesterol are measured to have slightly higher life expectancies than those with less!
2) Problems with the way thyroid deficiency is assessed and treated.
3) Suggestions that non-drug treatments for cancer have been played down (massively) because the pharmaceutical industry don't like that idea.
4) Suggestions that chemotherapy is very unlikely to effect a cure for many types of cancer, so in effect the patient is encouraged to swap what life they have left for a slightly longer period suffering very unpleasant side effects. Again, the pharmaceutical industry benefits hugely.
These are not medical mistakes, they are instances where the facts seem well known among researchers, but are ignored.
I think the only thing that keeps science clean, is when it is involved in making something that will visibly fail if the science is wrong.
David
The medical stuff is seemingly endless. I sound like a broken record, but The Cancer Industry by Ralph Moss is a must read for everyone in a Western country . . . the stuff's unreal, honestly.
Yes, and speaking of chemo, I've heard of several studies that said on average, a person with cancer is more apt to live longer, actually, if they do nothing than if they opt for mainstream (chemo & radiation) treatment. I'm sure that depends highly on which cancer and such, but it's still very, very explosive info . . . they say that most likely if you have a tumor, that it's been there for years and you/they just found it. Yet they will certainly have you believe that you must make a decision pronto! Or else your life's in immediate danger!
And yes, as far as these not being medical mistakes, I think of a complaint about all that that I voice often to those that know me, which is about the absurdity of suggesting the complete opposite of what one needs for heart (or any other kind of) health: high grain intake coupled with low fat and low meat; plus not a lot of emphasis cutting processed garbage like sodas . . . all of which is very, very hard for me to take seriously . . . in the sense that no one knew better . . . for 40 plus years. I eat very high fat (pastured cow butter, coconut, nuts, avocados, fresh rendered lard from a local farmer who raises the animals eating what they were designed to eat by evolution, ghee), very low carb (and almost exclusively veggies and fruit for carbs), and the highest quality meat (100% pasture raised or wild caught fish (or the 25 pounds of shrimp fresh off the boat I bought last week)), and I'm the only one that I work around - including many much younger than me - that is not and has never been on any pharmaceutical. Ever. They're simply garbage, and harmful garbage at that. Everyone that first meets me and realizes all this at first completely assumes that I eat low fat. I tell them, no, I don't eat low fat. It almost invariably comes up again by the same person: they imply again that I wouldn't eat what they're eating because what they're eating is high in fat. I tell them, again, that I have no objection to eating high fat, I only object to eating man made, non-food (shit) fat. Denise Minger's "Death By Food Pyramid" tells the story of a woman who was with the FDA during the 60's when the precursor to the food pyramid was being formed and how she realized some of these errors . . . and how she was told or "encouraged" not to go that route.
The ignorant country folk could've told one better right off the bat (concerning at least a good deal of this food info). Now, as it turns out, the ignorant country folk are doubtful of climate change, and I'm inclined to trust them more than the plethora of "experts" telling us otherwise.
Good last point about a visible failure being the only thing that keeps science clean.
Clarification: I'm not saying I've never taken a pharmaceutical. I have, mainly when I was younger and those were my parent's decision. I took, of all God-awful things: acutane. How embarrassing. I remember my mother saying that "they" used to say it was about the food you eat and grease and such, but that now (25 years ago), they're saying that's not the cause. Liars! And I've taken antibiotics on rare occasions, though always coupled with probiotics. But I've never been indefinitely on any pharmaceutical. And never will be.