The Starfield Revelation


The Starfield Revelation: The grave extent of medically caused death in America

By Jon Rappoport

Barack Obama and his allies have done everything they can to bring more people into the US medical system. Changing that system has never occurred to these politicians.

Like much of America, they accept the cliches and slogans about American medicine. “It’s the best in the world.” “People are being denied treatment.” “We must take care of our citizens.”

How about this far more accurate slogan: “Let’s force more Americans to die in the care of doctors.”

The American healthcare system, like clockwork, causes a mind-boggling number of deaths every year.

On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, came to the following conclusions:

Every year in the US there are:

12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;

7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;

20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;

80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;

106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.

The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.


This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in the US, behind heart disease and cancer.

The Starfield study is the most disturbing revelation about modern healthcare in America ever published in the mainstream.

On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was rather perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.

All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this situation preferred to ignore it.

On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here are excerpts from that interview.

What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?


Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [of its new drugs]—which puts the FDA into an untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

Aren’t your 2000 findings a severe indictment of the FDA and its standard practices?

They are an indictment of the US health care industry: insurance companies, specialty and disease-oriented medical academia, the pharmaceutical and device manufacturing industries, all of which contribute heavily to re-election campaigns of members of Congress. The problem is that we do not have a government that is free of influence of vested interests. Alas, [it] is a general problem of our society—which clearly unbalances democracy.

Can you offer an opinion about how the FDA can be so mortally wrong about so many drugs?

Yes, it cannot divest itself from vested interests. (Again, [there is] a large literature about this, mostly unrecognized by the people because the industry-supported media give it no attention.)

Would it be correct to say that, when your JAMA study was published in 2000, it caused a momentary stir and was thereafter ignored by the medical community and by pharmaceutical companies?

Are you sure it was a momentary stir? I still get at least one email a day asking for a reprint—ten years later! The problem is that its message is obscured by those that do not want any change in the US health care system.

Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

What was your personal reaction when you reached the conclusion that the US medical system was the third leading cause of death in the US?

I had previously done studies on international comparisons and knew that there were serious deficits in the US health care system, most notably in lack of universal coverage and a very poor primary care infrastructure. So I wasn’t surprised.

Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

Do the 106,000 deaths from medical drugs only involve drugs prescribed to patients in hospitals, or does this statistic also cover people prescribed drugs who are not in-patients in hospitals?

I tried to include everything in my estimates. Since the commentary was written, many more dangerous drugs have been added to the marketplace.

The Matrix Revealed


This interview with Dr. Starfield reveals that, even when an author has unassailable credentials within the medical-research establishment, the findings can result in no changes made to the system.

Many persons and organizations within the medical system contribute to the annual death totals of patients, and media silence and public ignorance are certainly major factors, but the FDA is the assigned gatekeeper, when it comes to the safety of medical drugs.

The buck stops there. If those drugs the FDA is certifying as safe are killing, like clockwork, 106,000 people a year, the Agency must be held accountable. The American people must understand that.

As for the other 119,000 people killed every year as a result of hospital treatment, this horror has to be laid at the doors of those institutions. Further, to the degree that hospitals are regulated and financed by state and federal governments, the relevant health agencies assume culpability.

It is astounding, as well, that the US Department of Justice has failed to weigh in on Starfield’s findings. If 225,000 medically caused deaths per year is not a crime by the Dept. of Justice’s standards, then what is?

To my knowledge, not one person in America has been fired from a job or even censured as result of these medically caused deaths.

Dr. Starfield’s findings have been available for ten years. She has changed the perception of the medical landscape forever. In a half-sane nation, she would be accorded a degree of recognition that would, by comparison, make the considerable list of her awards pale. And significant and swift action would have been taken to punish the perpetrators of these crimes and reform the system from its foundations.

The pharmaceutical giants stand back and carve up the populace into “promising markets.” They seek new disease labels and new profits from more and more toxic drugs. They do whatever they can—legally or illegally—to influence doctors in their prescribing habits. Many studies which show the drugs are dangerous are buried. FDA panels are filled with doctors who have drug-company ties. Legislators are incessantly lobbied and supported with pharma campaign monies.

Nutrition, the cornerstone of good health, is ignored or devalued by most physicians. Meanwhile, the FDA continues to attack nutritional supplements, even though the overall safety record of these nutrients is excellent, whereas, once again, the medical drugs the FDA certifies as safe are killing 106,000 Americans per year.

Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the whole literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at

Five questions you should ask about your destiny

Five questions you should ask about your destiny

by Jon Rappoport

December 21, 2012

How you look at your life, what you do in life, where you go in life, and with whom…all these decisions are wrapped up in what you think about your destiny.

Granted, this isn’t a subject that pops up on the radar of most people. But you aren’t most people.

The subject of destiny has been defined by various cultures and religions since the dawn of time on this planet. Answers have been supplied. These answers are accepted for a period, and then new cultures and new answers appear.

But such collective solutions aren’t necessarily yours. You have to make your own inquiry. And in the end, you decide.

So here are five crucial questions to ask yourself.

One: Is my destiny determined by forces outside myself?

Two: Do I choose my own destiny?

Three: Is my destiny the result of some combination of my own choices and outside forces? If so, how does this “collaboration” work?

Four: Is my destiny inevitably wrapped up in the future of others?

Five: Is my destiny unique to me, apart from the future of others?

In the West, this spirit of inquiry emerged in the Dialogues of Plato, who presented conversations between his former teacher, Socrates, and citizens of Athens.

For the most part, Socrates chose abstract qualities like Justice and Piety to open his conversations; as in, what is Piety? What is Justice? What is the Good?

Now, in the second decade of the 21st century, we are faced with a crisis which threatens to obliterate our civilization. Although I could choose many issues as examples of this threat, I select education itself.

For example, by designed omission, the whole question of The Group versus The Individual has been placed on a shelf where it receives scant attention.

Likewise, free will versus determinism has been excised from serious philosophical discussion.

People say, “Well, we don’t have time for all that ‘thinking’. It’s a luxury we can’t afford. We’re just trying to survive.”

But history proves that when the people leave these matters to a few elite thinkers, by default momentous currents are launched. And then the people are pulled along, whether they like it or not.

Ideas aren’t just luxuries or toys. They rescue or drown whole societies.

Of course, if education in all its forms doesn’t prepare people to be able to think beyond the ends of their noses, then the prospect of answering the big questions is rendered moot, because people aren’t equipped for the job.

The word “destiny” itself has mixed messages. It appears to be associated with a pre-fixed outcome. On the other hand, it can be shaped.

The kind of New Age material that was distorted and imported from the East during the 1960s has left a legacy of “surrender.” If you “let go” of enough preconceived perception, you’ll drift upward and connect with a greater universal consciousness. Is this so?

Does destiny involve merging into a larger whole? Does it rather involve extricating yourself from that whole?

These aren’t questions designed merely for the young. Answering them impacts your future and the future of your children in numerous ways. Neglecting to answer them is refusing to have navigational skills on the open sea.

Americans pride themselves on being practical and pragmatic. They opt for “what works” and discard everything else. But that approach has pitfalls. It excludes, for example, pursuing deep desires in the face of long odds. It ends up in shallow materialism, as if that were the totality of life.

John Dewey, the arch-pragmatist philosopher, defined American education for millions of people. He set its course along a stripped-down path that helped produce generations of dumbed-down worker bees.

The Matrix Revealed

Dewey accomplished this by default. His challengers were few, and they were weak. Their supply of counter-proposals was garbled and impotent. Dewey didn’t just win the day through top-down manipulation of the American educational system. He triumphed because his opponents were unprepared to argue that human destiny was far wider and deeper than the next practical decision of the moment.

So consider these five questions and understand that your future is, in a real sense, riding on your answers. It always has. This is the way progress happens. People undertake a significant inquiry and come to conclusions. The inquiry may, depending on how honest you are, take five minutes or it may take a year. In either case, the future comes into focus based on your answers.

One could simply ask himself, “What do I really want to do in life?” A very good question. But, as it turns out, the reply to that question is often obscured by prior unasked and unanswered questions.

In other words, a person’s prior view of his own existence is already limited, because he hasn’t found out what he really thinks about something big. Something like destiny.

These are the famous words Plato placed into the mouth of Socrates: “The unexamined life is not worth living.”

Americans are suspicious about this statement when they hear it or read it. They think it implies years of useless and even self-destructive internal wrangling that will come to nothing.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. There is productive thought. It’s motivated to take the ceiling off limited perception of what is possible in this thing called existence.

If you choose to, you have the natural right remove ceilings. Doing it is part of what and who you are.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at