The profit graph they have is meaningless. Express it as a simple % profit or STFU. If a XX% profit is unacceptable for a drug company, it's unacceptable for ANY business, or even person.
Given the exactly even numbers of deaths, we can assume that the numbers are made up based on guestimates of doses used and the % of deadly complications. In other words, those numbers are meaningless. Actual deaths could be considerably different in either direction.
The source is clearly bogus, it's be as bad as an OP about how awesome all drugs are with the source as a drug company.
"Journalists" would be a similarly unreliable source unless the author is a trained medical doctor or toxicologist at the very least (journalists show most all the time that they don't have even a basic grasp of the science they report on—if you can't read a real scientific paper and follow it, you shouldn't be writing about science)
A paper about this off PubMed or something would be a reliable source on mortality (and would still likely be equivocal).
__________________
"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." — Thomas Paine
|