In 1995, another whistleblower, Emeritus Professor Heather Ashton, submitted a research proposal to the MRC to look at benzos and permanent brain damage using EEG, MRI scans and cognitive testing in a randomised controlled trial, but her proposal was also rejected.
The MRC, for it's part, whines that it accepted Professor Lader's report in 1982, and was always open to any research application of the highest quality science as judged by peer review, and that "We do not fund research which does not meet this quality standard."
To me, the MRC's failure to accept research appears to be a case of the three monkeys.
The problem as Professor Lader states, is that "GPs are still swinging them (benzos) around like Smarties." And people continue to become "involuntary addicts" in their millions.
Obviously, benzos have been a marvelllloussss product for the drug companies. For decades, addicted consumers have kept their profits at a scintilating level, and spawned a whole new industry of "withdrawal clinics". Given that it takes some people decades to get off benzos, and they often require other drugs to stop the hallucinations which occur during withdrawal. Some then get addicted to the new drugs as well. Who needs an illegal drug cartel when there's a prescription drug so readily available? Why talk about P, when there's a serious issue right there, within the medical system, today - which is hardly ever talked about?
There are numerous forums and message boards around internet where desperate benzo users seek solutions to addiction issues. About which the drug companies don't give a fig. They are only interested in their balance sheets. And maintaining the illusion of a high moral ground, and public altruism painted with halos above their heads. The article says:
Emma Jones a solicitor at Leigh Day & Co, said: "We're
aware of earlier litigation against the drug companies which did not
succeed. It is interesting that these documents may well have been
pertinent at that time. It seems rather strange that such information
was kept 'hidden' for so long."
Anyone who knows medical history, can recite numerous instances in which information has been deliberately hidden for decades and eventually come to light long after patents have expired.
I believe that there is far more hidden information to find relating to antibiotics, acetaminophen products, the pill, IUDs, vaccines and other drugs as well. I'm sure the medical system would LOVE to shout from the roof tops, "But vaccines are lily-white, with no nasty little revelations to be found out later - and look at the diseases we've wiped out with them!" Just like all the benzo makers will say, "But look at all the people we made happy with legalised drugs! What would they have done without us?" Because we can do something, should we? There are always other solutions, but there is one mantra which the medical profession follows without fail. THE QUICKEST FIX IS THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE. "Cost" simply means taxes thrown directly at the problem. "Cost" never evaluates the "cost" to the person or the cost to society of fixing up the messes caused by the "cost effective quick fix".
Thing is, I believe there are a whole lot of hidden documents about vaccines showing issues which will come back to bite us later.... just as there are about SSRI's, benzos, and a whole raft of other drugs and devices.
While someone got to see the secret documents about benzos, we will never see any secret documents about vaccines, because being the Holy Grail and the part of the drug industry with the most expansion potential in the future, documents relating to vaccines will have been destroyed or marked "Hidden in perpetuity".
In my opinion, the turning down of benzo research proposals by the British Medical Research council, had nothing to do with the two Professor's research proposals not meeting application criteria, but everything to do with "following the money".
And it should be compulsory for every medical student to read Felicity Bielovich's book called "The Judas Window". It's a very appropriate title, which aptly describes the British Medical Research Council.