New World System structuring exposed in 1969!

**PAULYPOKER** · 03-29-13, 03:55 PM

IS THERE A POWER, A FORCE OR A GROUP OF MEN ORGANIZING AND REDIRECTING CHANGE?

There has been much written, and much said, by some people who have looked at all the changes that have occurred in American society in the past 20 years or so, and who have looked retrospectively to earlier history of the United States, and indeed, of the world, and come to the conclusion that there is a conspiracy of sorts which influences, indeed controls. major historical events, not only in the United States, but also around the world.

This conspiratorial interpretation of history is based on people making observations from the outside, gathering evidence and concluding that from the outside they see a conspiracy. Their evidence and conclusions are based on evidence gathered in retrospect. I want to now describe what I heard from a speaker in 1969, which in several weeks will now be 20 years ago.

The speaker did not speak in terms of retrospect, but rather predicting changes that would be brought about in the future. The speaker was not looking from the outside in, thinking that he saw conspiracy, rather, he was on the inside, admitting that, indeed, there was an organised power, force, group of men, who wielded enough influence to determine major events involving countries around the world. In addition, he predicted, or rather expounded on, changes that were planned for the remainder of this century.

As you listen, if you can recall the situation, at least in the United States in 1969 and the few years there after, and then recall the kinds of changes which have occurred between then and now, almost 20 years later, I believe you will be impressed with the degree to which the things that were planned to be brought about have already been accomplished. Some of the things that were discussed were not intended to be accomplished yet by 1988. [Note: the year of this recording] but are intended to be accomplished before the end of this century.

There is a timetable; and it was during this session that some of the elements of the timetable were brought out. Anyone who recalls early in the days of the Kennedy campaign when he spoke of progress in the decade of the 60's": That was kind of a cliché in those days - "the decade of the 60's." Well, by 1969 our speaker was talking about the decade of the 70's, the decade of the 80's, and the decade of the 90's. Prior to that time, I don't remember anybody saying "the decade of the 40's and the decade of the 50's. So I think this overall plan and timetable had taken important shape with more predictability to those who control it, sometime in the late 50's.

That's speculation on my part. In any event, the speaker said that his purpose was to tell us about changes which would be brought about in the next 30 years or so, so that an entirely new world-wide system would be in operation before the turn of the century. As he put it, "We plan to enter the 21st Century with a running start."[emphasis supplied]

**pronk** · 03-29-13, 07:20 PM

Pauly, those satanic midgets days are numbered brother. Always remember that Almighty God is on our side.

**paw** · 03-29-13, 10:20 PM

G-D

Has nothing to do with it. Not mention moist likely you G-d is the orignal Sun G-d that has been repackaged 15 times thru history.

**pronk** · 03-29-13, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by paw

G-D

Has nothing to do with it. Not mention moist likely you G-d is the orignal Sun G-d that has been repackaged 15 times thru history.

My God is Almighty GOD who rules by his might forever, whose eyes keep watch on the nations—let not the rebellious exalt themselves.

**PAULYPOKER** · 03-30-13, 10:17 AM

EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE AND NOBODY CAN STOP US NOW

He said, as we listened to what he was about to present, "Some of you will think I'm talking about Communism. Well, what I'm talking about is much bigger than Communism!" At that time he indicated that there is much more co-operation between East and West than most people realise. In his introductory remarks, he commented that he was free to speak at this time. He would not have been able to say what he was about to say, even a few years earlier. But he was free to speak at this time because now, and I'm quoting here, "everything is in place and nobody can stop us now."

He went on to say that most people don't understand how governments operate and even people in high positions in governments, including our own, don't really understand how and where decisions are made. He went on to say that people who really influence decisions are names that for the most part would be familiar to most of us, but he would not use individuals' names or names of any specific organisation. But that, if he did, most of the people would be names that were recognized by most of his audience.

He went on to say that they were not primarily people in public office, but people of prominence who were primarily known in their private occupations or private positions. The speaker was Dr. Richard Day, a doctor of medicine and a former professor at a large Eastern university, and he was addressing a group of doctors of medicine, about 80 in number. His name would not be widely recognised by anybody likely to hear this. The only purpose in recording this is that it may give a perspective to those who hear it regarding the changes which have already been accomplished in the past 20 years or so, and a bit of a preview to what at least some people are planning for the remainder of this century, so that they would enter the 21st Century with a flying start.

Some of us may not enter that Century. His purpose in telling our group about these changes that were to be brought about was to make it easier for us to adapt to these changes. Indeed, as he quite accurately said, "they would be changes that would be very surprising, and in some ways difficult for people to accept," and he hoped that we, as sort of his friends, would make the adaptation more easily if we knew somewhat beforehand what to expect.

**PAULYPOKER** · 03-30-13, 02:54 PM

The American public was not shaping into this plan of order fast enough.........

So the American public needed a push...........

The push was 911........

We are now back on plan,but I suspect a final push of the American public to come in the near future.......

**Fidel_CashFlow** · 03-30-13, 03:35 PM

**face** · 03-30-13, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by PAULYPOKER

<dt> </dt><dt>
WEATHER CONTROL

</dt>that one's a stretch

**Sawyer** · 03-30-13, 05:08 PM

...

**PAULYPOKER** · 03-30-13, 06:57 PM

Originally posted by face

that one's a stretch

The government was controlling the weather in 1966, Vietnam,the UK Royal Air Force was controlling weather in 1949.......

Read all my posts in this thread......

Did I hear right: DC metro area got more than 1

All the proof of capability is there and then some..........

**PAULYPOKER** · 03-31-13, 08:47 PM

PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO GET USED TO CHANGE

Somewhere in the introductory remarks he insisted that nobody have a tape recorder and that nobody take notes, which for a professor was a very remarkable kind of thing to expect from an audience.

Something in his remarks suggested that there could be negative repercussions against him if it became widely known that indeed he had spilled the beans, so to speak. When I first heard that, I thought maybe that was sort of an ego trip, somebody enhancing his own importance. But as the revelations unfolded, I began to understand why he might have had some concern about not having it widely known what was said although this was a fairly public forum where he was speaking. Nonetheless, he asked that no notes be taken, no tape recording be used.

This was suggesting there might be some personal danger to himself if these revelations were widely publicized Again, as the remarks began to unfold, and heard the rather outrageous things that were said, I made it a point to try to remember as much of what he said as I could and to connect my recollections to simple events around me to aid my memory for the future, in case I wanted to do what I'm doing now - recording this.

I also wanted to try to maintain a perspective on what would be developing, if indeed, it followed the predicted pattern - which it has! At this point, so that I don't forget to include it later, I'll just include some statements that were made from time to time throughout the presentation. One of the statements was having to do with change. The statement was, "People will have to get used to the idea of change, so used to change, that they'll be expecting change. Nothing will be permanent."

This often came out in the context of a society where people seemed to have no roots or moorings, but would be passively willing to accept change simply because it was all they had ever known. This was sort of in contrast to generations of people up until this time where certain things you expected to be, and remain in place as reference points for your life.

So change was to be brought about, change was to be anticipated and expected, and accepted, no questions asked. Another comment that was made from time to time during the presentation was. "People are too trusting, people don't ask the right questions." Sometimes, being too trusting was equated with being too dumb. But sometimes when he would say that "People don't ask the right questions," it was almost with a sense of regret as if he were uneasy with what he was part of, and wished that people would challenge it and maybe not be so trusting.

**pulledclear** · 03-31-13, 08:58 PM

What a dck head!

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-01-13, 03:31 PM

THE REAL AND THE STATED GOALS

Another comment that was repeated from time to time, particularly in relation to changing laws and customs was, "Everything has two purposes. One is the ostensible purpose which will make it acceptable to people and second is the real purpose which would further the goals of establishing the new system.

Frequently he would say, "There is just no other way, there's just no other way!" This seemed to come as a sort of an apology, particularly at the conclusion of describing some particularly offensive changes. For example, the promotion of drug addiction which we'll get into later.

**mikejamm** · 04-01-13, 05:55 PM

By any chance will this new fuk'in world order include poker?

You'd think these conspirators you speak of would find some fuk'in way to get us all hook on online gambling, so they could brainwash us and take all our money.

Fuk taxation, just let us gamble our damn money away! See, if our government had any fuk'in sense at all, this shit would already be in place!

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-02-13, 06:24 PM

POPULATION CONTROL

He was very active with population control groups, the population control movement, and population control was really the entry point into specifics following the introduction. He said the population is growing too fast. Numbers of people living at any one time on the planet must be limited or we will run out of space to live. We will outgrow our food supply and will pollute the world with our waste.

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-03-13, 07:21 PM

PERMISSION TO HAVE BABIES

People won't be allowed to have babies just because they want to or because they are careless. Most families would be limited to two. Some people would be allowed only one, however outstanding people might be selected and allowed to have three. But most people would be allowed to have only two babies. That's because the zero population growth rate is 2.1 children per completed family. So something like every 10th family might be allowed the privilege of the third baby.

To me, up to this point, the words 'population control' primarily connoted limiting the number of babies to be born. But this remark about what people would be 'allowed' and then what followed, made it quite clear that when you hear 'population control' that means more than just controlling births.

It means control of every endeavor of an entire world population; a much broader meaning to that term than I had ever attached to it before hearing this. As you listen and reflect back on some of the things you hear, you will begin to recognize how one aspect dovetails with other aspects in terms of controlling human endeavors.

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-04-13, 09:27 PM

REDIRECTING THE PURPOSE OF SEX

Well, from population control, the natural next step then was sex. He said sex must be separated from reproduction. Sex is too pleasurable, and the urges are too strong, to expect people to give it up. Chemicals in food and in the water supply to reduce the sex drive are not practical.

The strategy then would be not to diminish sex activity, but to increase sex activity, but in such a way, that people won't be having babies.

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-05-13, 03:17 PM

CONTRACEPTION UNIVERSALLY AVAILABLE TO ALL

The first consideration here was contraception. Contraception would be very strongly encouraged, and it would be connected closely in people's minds with sex. They would automatically think contraception when they were thinking or preparing for sex, and contraception would be made universally available.

Contraceptives would be displayed much more prominently in drug stores, right up with the cigarettes and chewing gum. Out in the open rather than hidden under the counter where people would have to ask for them and maybe be embarrassed.

This kind of openness was a way of suggesting that contraceptives are just as much a part of life as any other items sold in the store. Contraceptives would be advertised and also dispensed in the schools in association with sex education!

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-05-13, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by PAULYPOKER

CONTRACEPTION UNIVERSALLY AVAILABLE TO ALL

The first consideration here was contraception. Contraception would be very strongly encouraged, and it would be connected closely in people's minds with sex. They would automatically think contraception when they were thinking or preparing for sex, and contraception would be made universally available.

Contraceptives would be displayed much more prominently in drug stores, right up with the cigarettes and chewing gum. Out in the open rather than hidden under the counter where people would have to ask for them and maybe be embarrassed.

This kind of openness was a way of suggesting that contraceptives are just as much a part of life as any other items sold in the store. Contraceptives would be advertised and also dispensed in the schools in association with sex education!

Judge Removes ALL AGE RESTRICTIONS and PARENTAL CONSENT, for ABORTION PILL

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-...ng-after-pill/

**William Walters** · 04-05-13, 05:06 PM

you love it in the fanny...tranny?

**pronk** · 04-05-13, 07:22 PM

Who is this tranny you keep referring to Billy?

**William Walters** · 04-06-13, 12:18 AM

Originally posted by pronk

Who is this tranny you keep referring to Billy?

pronk..........have you NOT seen this (below) thread??? our local tranny, Paula, came out of the closet as a nobody around here. then....when the thread was bumped 18 months later..........and Paula thought she/he/it was a somebody........it tried to deny it and claim it was a joke (18 months later

).

ENJOY!

SBR Forum - Sports Betting Talk - Sportsbook Review Forum

http://forum.sbrforum.com/saloon/533007-okay-guys-time-me-honest-come-outta-closet.html

Sports betting and handicapping forum: discuss picks, odds, and predictions for upcoming games and results on latest bets.

**SamDiamond** · 04-06-13, 06:25 AM

Who the fuk took Paula off her meds?

SheHe is on a tinfoil hat war with the New World Order.

SheHe's another one--- "I saw this thing on the internet-- and it's TRUE!!"

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-06-13, 01:30 PM

SEX EDUCATION AS A TOOL OF WORLD GOVERNMENT

The sex education was to get kids interested early, making the connection between sex and the need for contraception early in their lives, even before they became very active. At this point I was recalling some of my teachers, particularly in high school and found it totally unbelievable to think of them agreeing, much less participating in, and distributing of contraceptives to students. But, that only reflected my lack of understanding of how these people operate.

That was before the school-based clinic programs got started. Many cities in the United States by this time have already set up school-based clinics, which are primarily contraception, birth control, population control clinics. The idea then is that the connection between sex and contraception introduced and reinforced in school would carry over into marriage.

Indeed, if young people when they matured decided to get married, marriage itself would be diminished in importance. He indicated some recognition that most people probably would want to be married, but this certainly would not be any longer considered necessary for sexual activity.

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-07-13, 06:51 PM

TAX FUNDED ABORTION AS POPULATION CONTROL

No surprise then that the next item was abortion. And this, now back in 1969, four years before Roe vs. Wade, he said, "Abortion will no longer be a crime." Abortion will be accepted as normal, and would be paid for by taxes for people who could not pay for their own abortions. Contraceptives would be made available by tax money so that nobody would have to do without contraceptives.

If school sex programs would lead to more pregnancies in children, that was really seen as no problem. Parents who think they are opposed to abortion on moral or religious grounds will change their minds when it is their own child who is pregnant. So this will help overcome opposition to abortion. Before long, only a few die-hards will still refuse to see abortion as acceptable, and they won't matter anymore.
________________________________________ ___________________________

Judge Removes ALL AGE RESTRICTIONS and PARENTAL CONSENT, for ABORTION PILL

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-...ng-after-pill/

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-08-13, 09:11 PM

ENCOURAGING HOMOSEXUALITY

"People will be given permission to be homosexual," that's the way it was stated.

They won't have to hide it. In addition, elderly people will be encouraged to continue to have active sex lives into the very old ages, just as long as they can. Everyone will be given permission to have sex, to enjoy however they want. Anything goes. This is the way it was put. In addition, I remember thinking, "How arrogant for this individual, or whoever he represents, to feel that they can give or withhold permission for people to do things!"

But that was the terminology that was used. In this regard, clothing was mentioned. Clothing styles would be made more stimulating and provocative. Back in 1969 was the time of the mini skirt, when those mini-skirts were very, very high and very revealing. He said, "It is not just the amount of skin that is exposed that makes clothing sexually seductive, but other, more subtle things are often suggestive." Things like movement, and the cut of clothing, and the kind of fabric, the positioning of accessories on the clothing. "If a woman has an attractive body, why should she not show it?" was one of the statements.

There was no detail on what was meant by 'provocative clothing', but since that time if you watched the change in clothing styles, blue jeans are cut in a way that they're more tight-fitting in the crotch. They form wrinkles. Wrinkles are essentially arrows. Lines which direct one's vision to certain anatomic areas. This was around the time of the 'burn your bra' activity.

He indicated that a lot of women should not go without a bra. They need a bra to be attractive, so instead of banning bras and burning them, bras would come back. But they would be thinner and softer allowing more natural movement. It was not specifically stated, but certainly, a very thin bra is much more revealing of the nipple and what else is underneath, than the heavier bras that were in style up to that time.

New York Catholic high school says gay teenagers can attend ...

Mar 30, 2013
I invite and encourage each and every one of us in the McQuaid ... fears about homosexuality and to curb the humor and discrimination that ...

The administrator of a Catholic high school in New York wrote to his students’ parents this week to explain why a gay couple at the all-boys school is being allowed to attend the junior prom together.

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-09-13, 10:12 AM

<dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">TECHNOLOGY</dt><dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;"> </dt><dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">

Earlier he said that sex and reproduction would be separated. You would have sex without reproduction and then technology was reproduction without sex. This would be done in the laboratory. He indicated that already much, much research was underway about making babies in the laboratory. There was some elaboration on that, but I don't remember the details. How much of that technology has come to my attention since that time. I don't remember in a way that I can distinguish what was said from what I subsequently have learned as general medical information.

OvaScience Infertility Technology Featured at 15th World Congress ...

Michelle Dipp, M.D., Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer of OvaScience commented, "The World Congress on Human Reproduction attracts ...

</dt>

**pronk** · 04-10-13, 01:07 PM

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-10-13, 11:18 PM

<dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">FAMILIES TO DIMINISH IN IMPORTANCE</dt><dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;"></dt><dt>

Families would be limited in size. We already alluded to not being allowed more than two children. Divorce would be made easier and more prevalent. Most people who marry will marry more than once. More people will not marry. Unmarried people would stay in hotels and even live together. That would be very common - nobody would even ask questions about it. It would be widely accepted as no different from married people being together.

More women will work outside the home. More men will be transferred to other cities and in their jobs, more men would travel. Therefore, it would be harder for families to stay together. This would tend to make the marriage relationship less stable and, therefore, tend to make people less willing to have babies.

The extended families would be smaller, and more remote. Travel would be easier, less expensive, for a while, so that people who did have to travel would feel they could get back to their families, not that they were abruptly being made remote from their families. But one of the net effects of easier divorce laws combined with the promotion of travel, and transferring families from one city to another, was to create instability in the families.

If both husband and wife are working and one partner is transferred, the other one may not be easily transferred. Soon, either gives up his or her job and stays behind while the other leaves, or else gives up the job and risks not finding employment in the new location. Rather a diabolical approach to this whole thing!</dt>

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-11-13, 10:18 PM

<dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">EUTHANASIA AND THE 'DEMISE PILL'</dt><dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;"> </dt><dt>

Everybody has a right to live only so long. The old are no longer useful. They become a burden. You should be ready to accept death. Most people are. An arbitrary age limit could be established. After all, you have a right to only so many steak dinners, so many orgasms, and so many good pleasures in life. After you have had enough of them and you're no longer productive, working, and contributing, then you should be ready to step aside for the next generation.

Some things that would help people realize that they had lived long enough, he mentioned several of these. I don't remember them all but here are a few, the use of very pale printing ink on forms that people are necessary to fill out. Older people wouldn't be able to read the pale ink as easily and would need to go to younger people for help. Automobile traffic patterns, there would be more high-speed traffic lanes that older people with their slower reflexes would have trouble dealing with and thus, loses some of their independence.

________________________________________ _____________________________________

The Peaceful Pill Handbook - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Peaceful Pill Handbook is a controversial book giving instructions on how to perform euthanasia. It was originally published in the U.S. in 2007 and was ...

</dt>

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-12-13, 04:01 PM

<dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">LIMITING ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE MEDICAL </dt><dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;"> </dt><dt>

A big item that was elaborated on at some length was the cost of medical care would be made burdensomely high. Medical care would be connected very closely with one's work but also would be made very, very high in cost so that it would simply be unavailable to people beyond a certain time. Unless they had a remarkably rich, supporting family, they would just have to do without care.

And the idea was that if everybody says, "Enough! What a burden it is on the young to try to maintain the old people," then the young would become agreeable to helping Mom and Dad along the way, provided this was done humanely and with dignity. Then the example was - there could be a nice, farewell party, a real celebration. Mom and Dad had done a good job. Then after the party's over they take the 'demise pill'.

Proposed Regulations Could Limit Access to Affordable Health ...

<cite>laborcenter.berkeley.edu/healthcare/Proposed_Regulations11.pdf</cite>

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
by K Jacobs - 2011 - Cited by 1 - Related articles

Dec 10, 2011 – Proposed Regulations Could Limit Access to. Affordable Health Coverage for Workers'. Children and Family Members by Ken Jacobs, Dave ...</dt>

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-13-13, 04:04 PM

<dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;">PLANNING THE CONTROL OVER MEDICINE</dt><dt style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: medium;"> </dt><dt>

The next topic is Medicine. There would be profound changes in the practice of medicine. Overall, medicine would be much more tightly controlled. The observation that was made in 1969 that, "Congress is not going to go along with national health insurance, is now, abundantly evident. But it's not necessary, we have other ways to control health care". These would come about more gradually, but all health care delivery would come under tight control. Medical care would be closely connected to work. If you don't work or can't work, you won't have access to medical care.

The days of hospitals giving away free care would gradually wind down, to where it was virtually non-existent. Costs would be forced up so that people won't be able to afford to go without insurance. People pay for it, you're entitled to it. It was only subsequently that I began to realize the extent to which you would not be paying for it. Your medical care would be paid for by others. Therefore, you would gratefully accept, on bended knee, what was offered to you as a privilege.

Your role being responsible for your own care would be diminished. As an aside here, this is not something that was developed at that time; I didn't understand it at the time that it was an aside.</dt><dt> </dt><dt>

The way this works, everybody has made dependent on insurance and if you don't have insurance then you pay directly; the cost of your care is enormous. The insurance company, however, paying for your care, does not pay that same amount. If you are charged, say, $600 for the use of an operating room, the insurance company does not pay $600; they only pay $300 or $400. That differential in billing has the desired effect: It enables the insurance company to pay for that which you could never pay for.

They get a discount that's unavailable to you. When you see your bill you're grateful that the insurance company could do that. And in this way you are dependent, and virtually required to have insurance. The whole billing is fraudulent. Access to hospitals would be tightly controlled and identification would be needed to get into the building.

The security in and around hospitals would be established and gradually increased so that nobody without identification could get in or move around inside the building. Theft of hospital equipment, things like typewriters and microscopes and so forth would be 'allowed' and exaggerated; reports of it would be exaggerated so that this would be the excuse needed to establish the need for strict security until people got used to it. Anybody moving about the hospital would be required to wear an identification badge with a photograph and telling why he was there, employee or lab technician or visitor or whatever.

This is to be brought in gradually, getting everybody used to the idea of identifying themselves - until it was just accepted. This need for ID to move about would start in small ways: hospitals, some businesses, but gradually expand to include everybody in all places! It was observed that hospitals can be used to confine people and for the treatment of criminals. This did not mean, necessarily, medical treatment. At that time I did not know the term 'Psycho-Prison' * they are in the Soviet Union, but, without trying to recall all the details, basically, he was describing the use of hospitals both for treating the sick, and for confinement of criminals for reasons other than the medical well-being of the criminal. The definition of criminal was not given.</dt>

**PAULYPOKER** · 04-13-13, 04:13 PM

'Deceitful' Pharma may put lives at risk

The Age-Apr 6, 2013
... and controlled a large portion of the most influential medical studies, ... ''The pharmaceutical largesse takes Australian doctors all over the ...

Taking on Big Pharma: Health activists meet on Capitol Hill

rabble.ca-Apr 8, 2013
Taking on Big Pharma: Health activists meet on Capitol Hill ... key state officials who held influence over drugs prescribed in state-run prisons and mental hospitals. ... the pharmaceutical industry's role in shaping medical research more ... roles lobbying for gun control and working for Planned Parenthood.

Big Pharma's little critics

Spiked-Mar 28, 2013
Drug companies control much of the information your doctor gets ... Still, the pharmaceutical sector is better known for being over-reliant both on 'me-too' ... all the world's medical journals to be open-access: in the era of the web and Big Data, ...

A new template for pharma research

Hindu Business Line-Apr 11, 2013
However, global Big Pharma has minced no words in warning that the judgment puts pharmaceutical innovation in great danger, especially in ...

Big Pharma big secrets

Vancouver Sun-by Randy Shore-Apr 11, 2013
Dr. Tom Perry, an internal medicine and clinical pharmacology ... Perry also called for much stricter control of drug advertising in Canada.

**Sacrelicious** · 04-14-13, 05:26 PM