Article 16024 of alt.conspiracy:
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,alt.individualism,alt.censorship,talk.politics.misc,misc.headlines,soc.culture.usa,sci.research,sci.med
Path: cbnewsl!jad
From: jad@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (John DiNardo)
Subject: Part IV, CHEMOTHERAPY: Deadly Treatment Yields Lively Profits
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: North America
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 12:01:54 GMT
Message-ID: <1992Sep30.120154.19356@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
Followup-To: alt.conspiracy
Keywords: the politics and the profits of the cancer industry
Lines: 145


        I made the following transcript from a tape recording 
        of a broadcast by Pacifica Radio Network station
               WBAI-FM (99.5)
               505 Eighth Ave., 19th Fl.
               New York, NY 10018       (212) 279-0707

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
                        (continuation)
RALPH MOSS:
But there was a parade of witnesses and doctors and patients, of
people from all different areas discussing the need for a
breakthrough in cancer and in other diseases, based on alternative
treatments. And the amazing thing about it ..... I mean, you or I
could assemble a group like that without too much difficulty, but 
to see this happening in the bastion of orthodoxy really was an
amazing sight. I mean, I had to pinch myself. I couldn't quite
understand what was going on. And, of course, we have to be very
conscious of the danger of co-optation in this situation. But, all
the same, I think it's an interesting development which could have
very big implications for the future.

The Government, the National Institute of Health, the Congress ....
they're all under siege from the Public because of the FAILURE of
orthodox medicine.  That's the way I read this. I don't think that
they would be opening their doors to us -- not even a little crack 
-- unless this [mainstream] system [of cancer treatment] was
on very very shaky ground. And so, I think that now is a good time
to go on the offensive and REALLY let the Public know about this.

Now, as you were discussing before in your conversation with Ed
Herman, the media is really the key. And here in New York, I think
that the problem -- aside from the broadcast networks -- in terms
of the print media, the main problem is with the New York Times.
I wonder if we could discuss that a little bit, and what your
perceptions are of the New York Times coverage of alternative
treatments. 

GARY NULL:
>From my perspective, the New York Times has been very remiss in not
offering a forum to allow people, who have support for the alternative
perspective, to present it.  Patient testimonials are dismissed or
not used at all. Scientists with proper credentials, who have come
up with views contrary to those of the Establishment, are not 
given equal opportunity.  Physicians who, in clinical practice, have
seen the benefits of both traditional and alternative means of
treatment ..... these physicians are generally allowed to be
attacked by the so-called quack-busters who, themselves have never
had success with any of the diseases that they're challenging the
alternative physicians' wanting to try their hand at. 

RALPH MOSS:
Yes.  Like when you had your meeting at the Lincoln Center, at the
Walter Reed Theater where you showed your AIDS film; you invited
the New York Times -- right? 

GARY NULL:
Yes.

RALPH MOSS:
And they didn't show up. Did they?

GARY NULL:
That's correct.

RALPH MOSS:
You know, what's really interesting is that when this O.T.A.
[Office of Technology Assessment] struggle was taking place, there
were many stories that appeared in the media around the country
about this O.T.A. report on unconventional medical practices. The
New York Times sent a reporter to interview a lot of the people who
were involved in that, including Frank Weiwold, who is the head of
People Against Cancer. And Frank told the reporter from the New
York Times -- he said: "This story will never be published."
And it never was.

I just did a story for a magazine called Propaganda Review on
cancer and the media. And I went back and I looked at the New York
Times's coverage at this time. Well they had something like -- 
I think it was nineteen stories that he did in those years about
the O.T.A., but not about the cancer report; about other reports
that the O.T.A. was doing. In fact, they PRAISED the O.T.A. They
said what an important agency it is, and so forth. But not A WORD
about this cancer report which the O.T.A. itself admitted was the
most controversial thing that they have ever done. More than half
the Congress wrote or called to complain about the O.T.A. reporter;
to demand information about what was happening. The New York Times
boycotted it.

Similarly, with this meeting that just took place in Washington,
there was a big story in NEWSWEEK about it, and there were two
favorable stories in the Washington Post; so favorable that, I mean,
you couldn't believe it.  One of those stories was like: The New
Age Has Dawned. The New Era Is Upon Us.   It was a wonderful story,
from my point-of-view. And that was the Washington Post which,
after all, is right up there with the Times.  But the New York Times
didn't cover it. And I would bet that, even though the Times had a
photographer there ..... but I think that the regular daily 
New York Times will never report on this meeting that is taking
place -- this committee of the National Institutes of Health; a
most important development. You can go back, in the New York Times,
just back to the time of laetrile, which was in the mid-70s, and
since then, I can't really think of a single news story that the 
New York Times has run on alternative therapies.  Can you?

GARY NULL:
No, I cannot. In fact, to this day I have seen the bias in the
New York Times's reporting on anything that is in the alternative
field. And they're continuing to quote these so-called quack-busters
as if they were experts, and [the Times is] not credible in
pretending to give balanced viewpoints. These are grossly distorted
and inaccurate views, and you can't get through to them.
  
Let me just give you an example. You were talking about Dr.Lawrence
Burton's cancer patients and his clinic being shut down. I was down
there [in the Bahamas] within one hour of the clinic being shut
down, to get it back open. I confronted the Prime Minister --
confronted him in an elevator in a meeting ..... One of the guys
said I was lucky I didn't get killed -- but nothing was working.
And Burton's patients were wringing their hands because they
couldn't get their treatments. I said: "Well, get in there at night.
Go in in the night and give your patients their treatments. I don't
care what the Government says. Screw the Government. You've got a
mandate, Burton."
                        (to be continued)
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   * 

        Someone close to you may now, or in the future, be fighting
        for their life against cancer, the dreaded scourge of modern
        societies. They will then need to exercise their RIGHT to
        explore the untold side of the cancer story -- the side which 
        the drug INDUSTRY, the medical INDUSTRY and the mass-media
        INDUSTRY would not want cancer victims to know about.
        Please post the articles of this series to other bulletin 
        boards, as well as posting hardcopies in public places,  
        both on and off campus.
        
        And ask your librarian to borrow for you (through the
        nationwide inter-library loan network) THIRD OPINION, by
        John Fink, 1992 edition, a directory of cancer treatment
        clinics throughout the world, many of which do not treat
        cancer by poisoning the patient.

            John DiNardo