Showing posts with label breast cancer awareness month. Show all posts
Showing posts with label breast cancer awareness month. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

Experts and Mammograms

(from naturalnews.com)

The experts speak on mammograms and breast cancer:

Regular mammography of younger women increases their cancer risks. Analysis of controlled trials over the last decade has shown consistent increases in breast cancer mortality within a few years of commencing screening. This confirms evidence of the high sensitivity of the premenopausal breast, and on cumulative carcinogenic effects of radiation.

The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 539
In his book, "Preventing Breast Cancer," Dr. Gofinan says that breast cancer is the leading cause of death among American women between the ages of forty-four and fifty-five. Because breast tissue is highly radiation-sensitive, mammograms can cause cancer. The danger can be heightened by a woman's genetic makeup, preexisting benign breast disease, artificial menopause, obesity, and hormonal imbalance.

Death By Medicine by Gary Null PhD, page 23
"The risk of radiation-induced breast cancer has long been a concern to mammographers and has driven the efforts to minimize radiation dose per examination," the panel explained. "Radiation can cause breast cancer in women, and the risk is proportional to dose. The younger the woman at the time of exposure, the greater her lifetime risk for breast cancer. 

Under The Influence Modern Medicine by Terry A Rondberg DC, page 122
Furthermore, there is clear evidence that the breast, particularly in premenopausal women, is highly sensitive to radiation, with estimates of increased risk of breast cancer of up to 1% for every rad (radiation absorbed dose) unit of X-ray exposure. This projects up to a 20% increased cancer risk for a woman who, in the 1970s, received 10 annual mammograms of an average two rads each. In spite of this, up to 40% of women over 40 have had mammograms since the mid-1960s, some annually and some with exposures of 5 to 10 rads in a single screening from older, high-dose equipment. 
The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 537

No less questionable—or controversial—has been the use of X rays to detect breast cancer: mammography. The American Cancer Society initially promoted the procedure as a safe and simple way to detect breast tumors early and thus allow women to undergo mastectomies before their cancers had metastasized.
The Cancer Industry by Ralph W Moss, page 23

The American Cancer Society, together with the American College of Radiologists, has insisted on pursuing largescale mammography screening programs for breast cancer, including its use in younger women, even though the NCI and other experts are now agreed that these are likely to cause more cancers than could possibly be detected.
The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 291

A number of "cancer societies" argued, saying the tests — which cost between $50-200 each - - are a necessity for all women over 40, despite the fact that radiation from yearly mammograms during ages 40-49 has been estimated to cause one additional breast cancer death per 10,000 women.
Under The Influence Modern Medicine by Terry A Rondberg DC, page 21

Mammograms Add to Cancer Risk—mammography exposes the breast to damaging ionizing radiation. John W. Gofman, M.D., Ph.D., an authority on the health effects of ionizing radiation, spent 30 years studying the effects of low-dose radiation on humans. He estimates that 75% of breast cancer could be prevented by avoiding or minimizing exposure to the ionizing radiation from mammography, X rays, and other medical sources. Other research has shown that, since mammographic screening was introduced in 1983, the incidence of a form of breast cancer called ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), which represents 12% of all breast cancer cases, has increased by 328%, and 200% of this increase is due to the use of mammography.69 In addition to exposing a woman to harmful radiation, the mammography procedure may help spread an existing mass of cancer cells. During a mammogram, considerable pressure must be placed on the woman's breast, as the breast is squeezed between two flat plastic surfaces. According to some health practitioners, this compression could cause existing cancer cells to metastasize from the breast tissue.
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 588

In fact the benefits of annual screening to women age 40 to 50, who are now being aggressively recruited, are at best controversial. In this age group, one in four cancers is missed at each mammography. Over a decade of pre-menopausal screening, as many as three in 10 women will be mistakenly diagnosed with breast cancer. Moreover, international studies have shown that routine premenopausal mammography is associated with increased breast cancer death rates at older ages. Factors involved include: the high sensitivity of the premenopausal breast to the cumulative carcinogenic effects of mammographic X-radiation; the still higher sensitivity to radiation of women who carry the A-T gene; and the danger that forceful and often painful compression of the breast during mammography may rupture small blood vessels and encourage distant spread of undetected cancers.
The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 540

Since a mammogram is basically an x-ray (radiation) of the breast, I do not recommend mammograms to my patients for two reasons: 1) Few radiologists are able to read mammogams correctly, therefore limiting their effectiveness. Even the man who developed this technique stated on national television that only about six radiologists in the United States could read them correctly. 2) In addition, each time the breasts are exposed to an x-ray, the risk of breast cancer increases by 2 percent.
The Hope of Living Cancer Free by Francisco Contreras MD, page 104

Mammography itself is radiation: an X-ray picture of the breast to detect a potential tumor. Each woman must weigh for herself the risks and benefits of mammography. As with most carcinogens, there is a latency period or delay between the time of irradiation and the occurrence of breast cancer. This delay can vary up to decades for different people. Response to radiation is especially dramatic in children. Women who received X-rays of the breast area as children have shown increased rates of breast cancer as adults. The first increase is reflected in women younger than thirty-five, who have early onset breast cancer. But for this exposed group, flourishing breast cancer rates continue for another forty years or longer.
Eat To Beat Cancer by J Robert Hatherill, page 132

The use of women as guinea pigs is familiar. There is revealing consistency between the tamoxifen trial and the 1970s trial by the NCI and American Cancer Society involving high-dose mammography of some 300,000 women. Not only is there little evidence of effectiveness of mammography in premeno-pausal women, despite NCI's assurances no warnings were given of the known high risks of breast cancer from the excessive X-ray doses then used. There has been no investigation of the incidence of breast cancer in these high-risk women. Of related concern is the NCI's continuing insistence on premeno-pausal mammography, in spite of contrary warnings by the American College of Physicians and the Canadian Breast Cancer Task Force and in spite of persisting questions about hazards even at current low-dose exposures. These problems are compounded by the NCI's failure to explore safe alternatives, especially transillumination with infrared light scanning.
The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 544

High Rate of False Positives—mammography's high rate of false-positive test results wastes money and creates unnecessary emotional trauma. A Swedish study of 60,000 women, aged 40-64, who were screened for breast cancer revealed that of the 726 actually referred to oncologists for treatment, 70% were found to be cancer free. According to The Lancet, of the 5% of mammograms that suggest further testing, up to 93% are false positives. The Lancet report further noted that because the great majority of positive screenings are false positives, these inaccurate results lead to many unnecessary biopsies and other invasive surgical procedures. In fact, 70% to 80% of all positive mammograms do not, on biopsy, show any presence of cancer.71 According to some estimates, 90% of these "callbacks" result from unclear readings due to dense overlying breast tissue.72
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 588

"Radiation-related breast cancers occur at least 10 years after exposure," continued the panel. "Radiation from yearly mammograms during ages 40-49 has been estimated to cause one additional breast cancer death per 10,000 women."
Under The Influence Modern Medicine by Terry A Rondberg DC, page 122

According to the National Cancer Institute, there is a high rate of missed tumors in women ages 40-49 which results in 40% false negative test results. Breast tissue in younger women is denser, which makes it more difficult to detect tumours, so tumours grow more quickly in younger women, and tumours may develop between screenings. Because there is no reduction in mortality from breast cancer as a direct result of early mammogram, it is recommended that women under fifty avoid screening mammograms although the American Cancer Society still recommends a mammogram every two years for women age 40-49. Dr. Love states, "We know that mammography works and will be a lifesaving tool for at least 30%."
Treating Cancer With Herbs by Michael Tierra ND, page 467

Equivocal mammogram results lead to unnecessary surgery, and the accuracy rate of mammograms is poor. According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), in women ages 40-49, there is a high rate of "missed tumors," resulting in 40% false-negative mammogram results. Breast tissue in younger women is denser, which makes it more difficult to detect tumors, and tumors grow more quickly in younger women, so cancer may develop between screenings.
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 973

Even worse, spokespeople for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) admit that mammograms miss 25 percent of malignant tumors in women in their 40s (and 10 percent in older women). In fact, one Australian study found that more than half of the breast cancers in younger women are not detectable by mammograms.
Underground Cures by Health Sciences Institute, page 42

Whatever you may be told, refuse routine mammograms to detect early breast cancer, especially if you are premenopausal. The X-rays may actually increase your chances of getting cancer. If you are older, and there are strong reasons to suspect that you may have breast cancer, the risks may be worthwhile. Very few circumstances, if any, should persuade you to have X-rays taken if you are pregnant. The future risks of leukaemia to your unborn child, not to mention birth defects, are just not worth it.
The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 305

Other medical research has shown that the incidence of a form of breast cancer known as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), which accounts for 12% of all breast cancer cases, increased by 328% — and 200% of this increase is due to the use of mammography!
Under The Influence Modern Medicine by Terry A Rondberg DC, page 123

As the controversy heated up in 1976, it was revealed that the hundreds of thousands of women enrolled in the program were never told the risk they faced from the procedure (ibid.). Young women faced the greatest danger. In the thirty-five- to fifty-year-old age group, each mammogram increased the subject's chance of contracting breast cancer by 1 percent, according to Dr. Frank Rauscher, then director of the National Cancer Institute (New York Times, August 23, 1976).
The Cancer Industry by Ralph W Moss, page 24

Because there is no reduction in mortality from breast cancer as a direct result of early mammograms, it is recommended that women under 50 avoid screening mammograms, although the American Cancer Society is still recommending a mammogram every two years for women ages 40-49. The NCI recommends that, after age 35, women perform monthly breast self-exams. For women over 50, many doctors still advocate mammograms. However, breast self-exams and safer, more accurate technologies such as thermography should be strongly considered as options to mammography.
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 973

In the midst of the debate, Kodak took out full-page ads in scientific journals entitled "About breast cancer and X-rays: A hopeful message from industry on a sober topic" (see Science, July 2, 1976). Kodak is a major manufacturer of mammography film.
The Cancer Industry by Ralph W Moss, page 24

The largest and most credible study ever done to evaluate the impact of routine mammography on survival has concluded that routine mammograms do significantly reduce deaths from breast cancer. Scientists in the United States, Sweden, Britain, and Taiwan compared the number of deaths from breast cancer diagnosed in the 20 years before mammogram screening became available with the number in the 20 years after its introduction. The research was based on the histories and treatment of 210,000 Swedish women ages 20 to 69. The researchers found that death from breast cancer dropped 44 percent in women who had routine mammography. Among those who refused mammograms during this time period there was only a 16 percent reduction in death from this disease (presumably the decrease was due to better treatment of the malignancy).
Dr Isadore Rosenfeld's Breakthrough Health By Isadore Rosenfeld MD, page 47

In 1993—seventeen years after the first pilot study—the biochemist Mary Wolff and her colleagues conducted the first carefully designed, major study on this issue. They analyzed DDE and PCB levels in the stored blood specimens of 14,290 New York City women who had attended a mammography screening clinic. Within six months, fifty-eight of these women were diagnosed with breast cancer. Wolff matched each of these fifty-eight women to control subjects—women without cancer but of the same age, same menstrual status, and so on—who had also visited the clinic. The blood samples of the women with breast cancer were then compared to their cancer-free counterparts.
Living Downstream by Sandra Steingraber PhD, page 12

One reason may be that mammograms actually increase mortality. In fact numerous studies to date have shown that among the under-50s, more women die from breast cancer among screened groups than among those not given mammograms. The results of the Canadian National Breast Cancer Screening Trial published in 1993, after a screen of 50,000 women between 40-49, showed that more tumors were detected in the screened group, but not only were no lives saved but 36 percent more women died from
The Cancer Handbook by Lynne McTaggart, page 57

One Canadian study found a 52 percent increase in breast cancer mortality in young women given annual mammograms, a procedure whose stated purpose is to prevent cancer. Despite evidence of the link between cancer and radiation exposure to women from mammography, the American Cancer Society has promoted the practice without reservation. Five radiologists have served as ACS presidents.53
When Healing Becomes A Crime by Kenny Ausubel, page 233

Premenopausal women carrying the A-T gene, about 1.5 percent of women, are more radiation sensitive and at higher cancer risk from mammography. It has been estimated that up to 10,000 breast cancer cases each year are due to mammography of A-T carriers.
The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 539

A study reported that mammography combined with physical exams found 3,500 cancers, 42 percent of which could not be detected by physical exam. However, 31 percent of the tumors were noninfiltrating cancer. Since the course of breast cancer is long, the time difference in cancer detected through mammography may not be a benefit in terms of survival.
Woman's Encyclopedia Of Natural Healing by Dr Gary Null, page 86

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also has called for more mammograms among women over 50. However, constant screening still can miss breast cancer. mammograms are at their poorest in detecting breast cancer when the woman is under 50.
The Cancer Handbook by Lynne McTaggart, page 53

Despite its shortcomings, every woman between the ages of fifty and sixty-nine should have one every year. I also recommend them annually for women over seventy, even though early detection isn't as important for the slow-growing form of breast cancer they tend to get. One mammogram should probably be taken at age forty to establish a baseline, but how often women should have them after that is debatable. Some authorities favor annual screening. Others feel there's not enough evidence to support screening at all before fifty. Still others believe that every two years is sufficient. I lean toward having individual women and their doctors go over the pros and cons and make their own decisions. Finally, a mammogram is appropriate at any age if a lump has been detected.
The Longevity Code By Zorba Paster MD, page 234 

For breast cancer, thermography offers a very early warning system, often able to pinpoint a cancer process five years before it would be detectable by mammography. Most breast tumors have been growing slowly for up to 20 years before they are found by typical diagnostic techniques. Thermography can detect cancers when they are at a minute physical stage of development, when it is still relatively easy to halt and reverse the progression of the cancer. No rays of any kind enter the patient's body; there is no pain or compressing of the breasts as in a mammogram. While mammography tends to lose effectiveness with dense breast tissue, thermography is not dependent upon tissue densities.
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 587

Monday, December 10, 2012

Why Healthcare and Wellness are NOT the same

Why Healthcare and Wellness are NOT the same

Why does the USA rank #1 in healthcare spending but #37 in the World Health Organization in overall quality (see lists below).  My opinion is that in the USA, we focus on sick care and not real health care or wellness care.  Due to advertising and propaganda, people have handed over the responsibility of their wellness to "healthcare system"- which is often subsidized by pharmaceutical corporations. According to data from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), at least half of all Americans take at least one prescription drug, with one in six taking three or more medications.  This is NOT an accident.  This is by design.  It's all about the dollar.  Common sense would tell us that if we spend more money on "healthcare" we would be healthier. Is this true?  No.   We are NOT getting healthier.  Look around. Do people look healthier?  Are people more active? More energetic? How many people are in chronic pain? How many people suffer from inflammation? How many children suffer from ADD and ADHD? 

How many times have you seen a television advertisement for a condition you never heard of? Do you think this is an accident?  Is this simply a way to sell more drugs?  Keep in mind, Wall Street STRONGLY encourages the CEOs of companies to expand market share.  If you were a CEO making several millions of dollars per year, would you expand market share if that's what it took to keep your job? The answer is yes, you would...you would do whatever it took to expand market share!

Because politicians are rewarded handsomely by big pharma via contributions  (http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=H04), any time healthcare reform is discussed or debated in Congress, the big pharma interest is always preserved.  At no point in time is the overall wellness of the US citizens considered.  Yes, politicians talk about taking care of the elderly and saving Medicare but they ALWAYS talk about keeping the cost of prescrpitions affordable. There is NEVER a discussion about prevention, nutrition, exercise, and supplementation.  In fact, Medicare states that "care that seeks to prevent disease, promote health, and prolong and enhance the quality of life, is not considered medically necessary."   Do you realize the power of this?  Drugs, which add to the bottom line of big pharma, are subsidized by the government but preventative measures will not be considered.  

As the White House and Congress debate deficits and debt why is NOBODY considering the cost savings of prevention?  Why are we talking about SAVING Medicare and drug benefits without discussing prevention? Whatever happened to "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure?"  Shouldn't we provide incentives to Americans to BE HEALTHY and NOT UTILIZE EXPENSIVE SICK CARE?????? If the number one expense to the federal government is Medicare/healthcare, then the number one target should be to reduce the cost by increasing effectiveness-- via prevention and TRUE WELLNESS.  We should focus on eating well, exercising, and supplementing intelligently. However, eating well, exercising and supplementing intelligently doesn't feed the dragon...


People need to understand the following:
  • Our healthcare system is not based on wellness - if it was, Medicare would cover preventative measures
  • Our healthcare system IS based on profit
  • There is no incentive in our current system to HEAL patients- the incentive is to get as many people as possible on maintenance pharmaceuticals
  • The FDA has NEVER tested the long-term effects of taking multiple prescription drugs in combination.  Many of these combinations are toxic to the kidneys, liver, & other organs. What happens when symptoms arise from kidney or liver damage? More drugs???!!!!
  • Breast Cancer Awareness Month (pink ribbons) is sponsored by a pharmaceutical company. This explains why the focus is on profit driven treatment and prevention methods 
    • courtesy of preventcancer.com: "Since 1985, Zeneca Pharmaceuticals has been the sole funder of October's National Breast Cancer Awareness Month (NBCAM). Zeneca's parent company, Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), is one of the world's largest manufacturers of petrochemical and chlorinated organic products -- including the plastic ingredient, vinyl chloride -- which has been directly linked to breast cancer, and the pesticide Acetochlor.  In addition, Zeneca is the sole manufacturer of Tamoxifen, the world's top-selling cancer drug used for breast cancer. In return for funding the awareness campaign, ICI/Zeneca has control and veto power over every poster, pamphlet and commercial produced by NBCAM."
 
So where do we go from here?  First of all, I would strongly recommend that each person find a caring health professional who understands wellness.  Openly discuss natural options to drugs with your health professional.  If your health professional seems completely closed to alternatives, find a new health professional.  Become educated.  Follow the money trail.  Utilize the internet to gather information about pharmaceuticals and procedures. Ask about options. Realize that every business, including your family physician's office, is driven by revenue-- and ultimately profit. Think about this when you receive advice


 
Healthcare spending by country:

 Rank           Country                                                        $ Per Capita  % of GDP


1  United States 7,164 15.2
2  Monaco 5,996 3.6
3  Luxembourg 5,750 6.8
4  Norway 5,207 8.5
5  Switzerland 4,815 10.7
6  Netherlands 4,283 9.9
7  Austria 4,150 10.2
8  Belgium 4,096 11.1
9  Germany 3,922 10.5
10  Canada 3,867 9.8
11  France 3,851 11.2
12  Denmark 3,814 9.9
13  Ireland 3,797 8.7
14  San Marino 3,690 7.1
15  Sweden 3,622 9.4
16  Iceland 3,583 9.2
17  Australia 3,365 8.5
18  Finland 3,299 8.8
19  United Kingdom 3,222 8.7
20  Andorra 3,128 7.5
21  Greece 3,010 10.1
22  Spain 2,941 9.0
23  Italy 2,836 8.7
24  Japan 2,817 8.3
25  New Zealand 2,655 9.7
26  Portugal 2,578 10.6
27  Slovenia 2,420 8.3
28  Niue 2,360 13.5
29  Israel 2,093 8.0
30  Taiwan (Republic of China)[3] 2,080 6.5
31  Slovakia 1,849 8.0
32  Cyprus 1,838 6.0
33  Singapore 1,833 3.3
34  Czech Republic 1,830 7.1
35  Korea, South 1,806 6.5
36  Bahamas, The 1,737 7.2
37  Qatar 1,691 2.0
38  Malta 1,664 7.3
39  Croatia 1,553 7.8
40  Hungary 1,506 7.2
41  Barbados 1,498 6.7
42  Estonia 1,325 6.1
43  Lithuania 1,318 6.6
44  Bahrain 1,282 3.7
45  Poland 1,271 7.0
46  Trinidad and Tobago 1,237 4.7
47  Latvia 1,206 6.6
48  Montenegro 1,162 8.4
49  Brunei 1,131 2.3
50  Chile 1,088 7.5
51  Argentina 1,062 7.4
52  Costa Rica 1,059 9.4
53  Botswana 1,053 7.6
54  Lebanon 1,009 8.8
55  Palau 991 10.8
56  Russia 985 4.8
57  Uruguay 982 7.8
58  Bulgaria 974 7.1
59  Antigua and Barbuda 958 4.7
60  Bosnia and Herzegovina 937 10.3
61  Kuwait 932 2.0
62  Panama 924 7.2
63  Seychelles 911 4.2
64  United Arab Emirates 888 2.5
65  Brazil 875 8.4
66  Serbia 867 10.0
67  Turkey 845 6.1
68  South Africa 843 8.2
69  Romania 840 5.4
70  Mexico 837 5.9
71  Saudi Arabia 831 3.6
72  Maldives 769 13.7
73  Macedonia, Republic of 738 6.8
74  Saint Kitts and Nevis 698 5.8
75  Saint Lucia 698 7.0
76  Belarus 688 5.6
77  Venezuela 683 5.4
78  Mauritius 681 5.5
79  Equatorial Guinea 658 1.9
80  Malaysia 621 4.3
81  Iran 613 5.5
82  Oman 600 2.1
83  Grenada 593 6.7
84  Dominica 584 6.0
85  Albania 569 6.8
86  Suriname 532 7.2
87  Colombia 517 5.9
88  Libya 502 3.0
89  Ukraine 502 6.8
90  Tunisia 500 6.4
91  Jordan 496 9.4
92  Cuba 495 12.0
93  Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 486 5.2
94  Ecuador 466 5.7
95  Dominican Republic 465 5.6
96  Kazakhstan 444 3.9
97  Namibia 440 6.9
98  Nauru 440 14.0
99  Algeria 437 5.4
100  Georgia 433 8.7
101  El Salvador 410 6.0
102  Federated States of Micronesia 408 13.3
103  Azerbaijan 395 4.3
104  Gabon 384 2.6
105  Peru 381 4.5
106  Jamaica 364 4.8
107  Cook Islands 361 4.3
108  Thailand 328 4.1
109  Belize 323 4.5
110  Moldova 320 10.7
111  Guatemala 308 6.5
112  Kiribati 304 12.5
113  Swaziland 287 5.8
114  Paraguay 281 6.0
115  Tuvalu 266 9.7
116  China 265 4.3
117  Samoa 264 5.9
118  Bhutan 263 5.5
119  Egypt 261 4.8
120  Marshall Islands 251 14.0
121  Nicaragua 251 9.4
122  Honduras 248 6.3
123  Guyana 247 8.1
124  Morocco 231 5.3
125  Armenia 224 3.8
126  Vietnam 201 7.2
127  Bolivia 194 4.5
128  Tonga 194 5.0
129  Sri Lanka 187 4.1
130  Angola 183 3.3
131  Cape Verde 176 4.4
132  Vanuatu 170 3.9
133  Fiji 168 3.5
134  Djibouti 153 6.9
135  São Tomé and Príncipe 153 8.7
136  Sudan 147 6.9
137  Solomon Islands 139 5.3
138  Uzbekistan 134 4.9
139  Yemen 133 4.8
140  Mongolia 131 3.8
141  Philippines 129 3.7
142  Turkmenistan 124 1.9
143  Kyrgyzstan 123 5.7
144  Syria 123 3.1
145  India 122 4.2
146  Lesotho 119 7.6
147  Cambodia 118 5.7
148  Cameroon 117 5.3
149  Ghana 114 7.8
150  Nigeria 113 5.2
151  Timor-Leste 112 13.9
152  Uganda 112 7.8
153  Congo, Republic of the 108 2.7
154  Iraq 107 3.3
155  Sierra Leone 104 13.3
156  Rwanda 102 9.4
157  Senegal 102 5.7
158  Tajikistan 95 5.0
159  Indonesia 91 2.3
160  Côte d'Ivoire 88 5.4
161  Chad 86 6.4
162  Laos 84 4.0
163  Burkina Faso 82 5.9
164  Zambia 80 5.9
165  Gambia, The 75 5.5
166  Papua New Guinea 70 3.2
167  Togo 70 6.2
168  Haiti 69 6.1
169  Kenya 66 4.2
170  Nepal 66 6.0
171  Mali 65 5.6
172  Pakistan 62 2.6
173  Benin 61 4.1
174  Guinea 58 5.5
175  Afghanistan 57 7.4
176  Tanzania 57 4.5
177  Mauritania 54 2.6
178  Burundi 50 13.0
179  Malawi 49 9.1
180  Guinea-Bissau 48 8.6
181  Liberia 46 11.9
182  Madagascar 46 4.4
183  Bangladesh 44 3.3
184  Niger 40 5.9
186  Comoros 39 3.5
185  Mozambique 39 4.7
187  Ethiopia 37 4.3
188  Central African Republic 32 4.3
189  Burma 27 2.2
190  Congo, Democratic Republic of the 23 7.3
191  Eritrea 18 3.1

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems.
Source:
WHO World Health Report 

The World Health Organization's ranking of the world's health systems was last produced in 2000, and the WHO no longer produces such a ranking table, because of the complexity of the task.



    Rank       Country
     
    1         France
    2         Italy
    3         San Marino
    4         Andorra
    5         Malta
    6         Singapore
    7         Spain
    8         Oman
    9         Austria
    10        Japan
    11        Norway
    12        Portugal
    13        Monaco
    14        Greece
    15        Iceland
    16        Luxembourg
    17        Netherlands
    18        United  Kingdom
    19        Ireland
    20        Switzerland
    21        Belgium
    22        Colombia
    23        Sweden
    24        Cyprus
    25        Germany
    26        Saudi Arabia
    27        United  Arab  Emirates
    28        Israel
    29        Morocco
    30        Canada
    31        Finland
    32        Australia
    33        Chile
    34        Denmark
    35        Dominica
    36        Costa Rica
    37        United States of America 
    38        Slovenia
    39        Cuba
    40        Brunei
    41        New Zealand
    42        Bahrain
    43        Croatia
    44        Qatar
    45        Kuwait
    46        Barbados
    47        Thailand
    48        Czech Republic
    49        Malaysia
    50        Poland
    51        Dominican Republic
    52        Tunisia
    53        Jamaica
    54        Venezuela
    55        Albania
    56        Seychelles
    57        Paraguay
    58        South     Korea
    59        Senegal
    60        Philippines
    61        Mexico
    62        Slovakia
    63        Egypt
    64        Kazakhstan
    65        Uruguay
    66        Hungary
    67        Trinidad and Tobago
    68        Saint     Lucia
    69        Belize
    70        Turkey
    71        Nicaragua
    72        Belarus
    73        Lithuania
    74        Saint Vincent  and the   Grenadines
    75        Argentina
    76        Sri  Lanka
    77        Estonia
    78        Guatemala
    79        Ukraine
    80        Solomon   Islands
    81        Algeria
    82        Palau
    83        Jordan
    84        Mauritius
    85        Grenada
    86        Antigua   and Barbuda
    87        Libya
    88        Bangladesh
    89        Macedonia
    90        Bosnia-Herzegovina
    91        Lebanon
    92        Indonesia
    93        Iran
    94        Bahamas
    95        Panama
    96        Fiji
    97        Benin
    98        Nauru
    99        Romania
    100       Saint Kitts and Nevis
    101       Moldova
    102       Bulgaria
    103       Iraq
    104       Armenia
    105       Latvia
    106       Yugoslavia
    107       Cook Islands
    108       Syria
    109       Azerbaijan
    110       Suriname
    111       Ecuador
    112       India
    113       Cape Verde
    114       Georgia
    115       El   Salvador
    116       Tonga
    117       Uzbekistan
    118       Comoros
    119       Samoa
    120       Yemen
    121       Niue
    122       Pakistan
    123       Micronesia
    124       Bhutan
    125       Brazil
    126       Bolivia
    127       Vanuatu
    128       Guyana
    129       Peru
    130       Russia
    131       Honduras
    132       Burkina   Faso
    133       Sao Tome and Principe
    134       Sudan
    135       Ghana
    136       Tuvalu
    137       Ivory Coast
    138       Haiti
    139       Gabon
    140       Kenya
    141       Marshall Islands
    142       Kiribati
    143       Burundi
    144       China
    145       Mongolia
    146       Gambia
    147       Maldives
    148       Papua New Guinea
    149       Uganda
    150       Nepal
    151       Kyrgystan
    152       Togo
    153       Turkmenistan
    154       Tajikistan
    155       Zimbabwe
    156       Tanzania
    157       Djibouti
    158       Eritrea
    159       Madagascar
    160       Vietnam
    161       Guinea
    162       Mauritania
    163       Mali
    164       Cameroon
    165       Laos
    166       Congo
    167       North Korea
    168       Namibia
    169       Botswana
    170       Niger
    171       Equatorial Guinea
    172       Rwanda
    173       Afghanistan
    174       Cambodia
    175       South     Africa
    176       Guinea-Bissau
    177       Swaziland
    178       Chad
    179       Somalia
    180       Ethiopia
    181       Angola
    182       Zambia
    183       Lesotho
    184       Mozambique
    185       Malawi
    186       Liberia
    187       Nigeria
    188       Democratic Republic of   the Congo
    189       Central   African   Republic
    190       Myanmar
     
     

The following is a list of the 20 largest pharmaceutical and biotech companies ranked by healthcare revenue. Some companies (e.g., Bayer, Johnson and Johnson and Procter & Gamble) have additional revenue not included here. The phrase Big Pharma is often used to refer to companies with revenue in excess of $3 billion, and/or R&D expenditure in excess of $500 million.

Revenue Rank 2008[48] Company Country Total Revenues (USD millions) Healthcare R&D 2006 (USD millions) Net income/ (loss) 2006 (USD millions) Employees 2006
1 Pfizer USA 67,809 7,599 19,337 122,200
2 Novartis Switzerland 53,324 7,125 11,053 138,000
3 Merck & Co. USA 45,987 4,783 4,434 74,372
4 Bayer Germany 44,200 1,791 6,450 106,200
5 GlaxoSmithKline United Kingdom 42,813 6,373 10,135 106,000
6 Johnson and Johnson USA 37,020 5,349 7,202 102,695
7 Sanofi France 35,645 5,565 5,033 100,735
8 Hoffmann–La Roche Switzerland 33,547 5,258 7,318 100,289
9 AstraZeneca United Kingdom 26,475 3,902 6,063 50,000+
10 Abbott Laboratories USA 22,476 2,255 1,717 66,800
11 Bristol-Myers Squibb USA 17,914 3,067 1,585 60,000
12 Eli Lilly and Company USA 15,691 3,129 2,663 50,060
13 Amgen USA 14,268 3,366 2,950 48,000
14 Boehringer Ingelheim Germany 13,284 1,977 2,163 43,000
15 Schering-Plough USA 10,594 2,188 1,057 41,500
16 Baxter International USA 10,378 614 1,397 38,428
17 Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Japan 10,284 1,620 2,870 15,000
18 Genentech USA 9,284 1,773 2,113 33,500
19 Procter & Gamble USA 8,964 n/a 10,340 29,258

SUM
497,519 70,843 110,077 1,342,700

AVERAGE
24876 3542 5504 67135

Market leaders in terms of sales

The top 15 pharmaceutical companies by 2008 sales are:

Rank Company Sales ($M) Based/Headquartered in
1 Pfizer 43,363 United States
2 GlaxoSmithKline 36,506 United Kingdom
3 Novartis 36,506 Switzerland
4 Sanofi-Aventis 35,642 France
5 AstraZeneca 32,516 United Kingdom
6 Hoffmann–La Roche 30,336 Switzerland
7 Johnson & Johnson 29,425 United States
8 Merck & Co. 26,191 United States
9 Abbott 19,466 United States
10 Eli Lilly and Company 19,140 United States
11 Amgen 15,794 United States
12 Wyeth 15,682 United States
13 Bayer 15,660 Germany
14 Teva 15,274 Israel
15Takeda13,819Japan

This blog was written by Phillip Black, VP of Orlampa Enterprises, Inc. 
Orlampa Enterprises, Inc. specializes in helping individuals, groups, & companies lose sickness and find wellness through the implementation of science based wellness programs.

Orlampa Enterprises also helps health care professionals implement holistic wellness programs into their existing practices with the goal to educate both the health care providers, their staffs, and the patients. The programs, which provide the health care professional with a substantial additional income stream in this ever changing medical marketplace, allow the patient to achieve true wellness instead of receiving a traditional treatment for symptoms.

Orlampa Enterprises is an internet based product broker specializing in personalized health and wellness related services. Orlampa Enterprises is primed to continue its growth by duplicating its successful business model of educating, training, and developing entrepreneurial leaders as business partners. As an Unfranchise™ business owner, Orlampa Enterprises, proudly utilizes highly researched products including nutraMetrix® nutritional supplements. 

 Orlampa Enterprises' motto is "Eat well, exercise, and supplement intelligently."

Contact Phillip at pb@orlampa.com to obtain more information about nutraMetrix® partnership opportunities available.