Allopathic vs Holistic 1

"When looking at the evolution of the American “health care” system, we see that an opportunity arose, never before available to any other gang in history."

Date:   6/25/2005 2:07:21 AM   ( 19 y ) ... viewed 6591 times

A NORMAL LIFE
Tim O Shea

Here is what a normal life should be like:

You're born. You get no drugs and no vaccinations. During childhood you have the usual illnesses, but conservative treatment gets you through them without antibiotics or drugs, and you build your natural immune defenses. You don't eat white sugar, white flour, too much meat or cheese, or drink milk or soft drinks. You concentrate on whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and a clean, natural diet. You never learn to drink coffee or to smoke cigarettes. The only pills you take are powerful whole food vitamins and enzymes and minerals, which are part of your daily intake. You drink at least 1 liter of water every day. Into adulthood, you never get sick: no colds, no flu, no headaches, no diabetes, no ADD, no "thyroid problems," no panic attacks, growing pains, fatigue, or digestive disorders, no high blood pressure. The only pains you experience come from accidental injury. Perhaps you do moderate exercise or sports activity to maintain mobility and general fitness. You look to the care of your spine. Your entire adulthood is spent in this disease-free mode. As you age, your mind gets sharper. You experience no arthritis, cancer, or osteoporosis, no Parkinson's or Alzheimer's. Finally one day after 90 or 100 years, you flicker like a candle and go out.

The above paragraph may be useful in choosing a doctor. Some doctors will say all this is impossible; which for them is true. So don't choose them. All this is possible; moreover, thousands and thousands of people are living it. So listen only to those who can help you achieve such a condition of living health. Because now we've arrived at the threshold of a time when good health and a powerful immune system are not only advisable; they are the very determinants of survival.


**********
Two opposing viewpoints of health and disease have been evident since ancient times. The conventional view, or Allopathic (literally, “other disease”) sees problems coming from outside the body. Or simply, the cause of disease comes from outside, then invades the body and the person gets "sick." The Germ Theory. Allopathic philosophy says that when the body has symptoms like pain, fever, or nausea, that means the person has caught some bug, some disease and needs to have these symptoms “treated” - i.e., covered up. Usually with drugs. If the disease localizes itself in one certain part of the body and won't go away, then that part of the body may have to be cut out with surgery. That's the allopathic viewpoint: disease, symptoms, drugs, surgery.

The holistic view is different. Holistic philosophy says that the cause and cure of all disease lie within the body. The parts of the body are interrelated in ways that are so complex, so sophisticated, so elegantly orchestrated and exquisitely tuned, as Deepak Chopra says, that all medical technology has only the crudest, faintest understanding of just a few basic mechanisms. In most cases, the body can heal itself if provided with the opportunity. It does this from the inside out - from the brain and spinal cord, outward through the nervous system, to every organ, and cell. For every time you have ever been sick, there have been hundreds of times when your immune system has conquered a disease without any overt symptoms being expressed. The mysteries of the body - its inner workings - are actually the most evolved systems in the universe. We are dealing with the life forces, the life substances - that which can never be viewed in dissection or isolated in laboratory culture. To influence these subtle, delicate interweavings, natural cures seek to nourish and encourage the body back into a condition of balance, by gentle support.

For the sake of clarity, here is a chart that describes attributes of each view:

[see page 8]

PARTS/WHOLE

Allopathic is the medicine of specialists: cardiologists, eye doctors, gynecologists, urologists, gastroenterologists, orthopedists, podiatrists, endocrinologists, neurologists, kidney doctors. They divide up the body and pretend to treat the parts in isolation. Like a car.

Early allopaths, called mechanists, saw the body as a machine that could be separated into component parts, and treated on that basis. Much easier to understand that way. Blame it on Descartes, the mind/body guy. To this end, the mechanists devised powerful potions with specific, quick, sometimes violent effects, which pretended to focus on the one “sick part.”

Before 1880, most medicine consisted of folk remedies, basic herbs, and crude surgery and dentistry. For centuries, there had not been much radical change in the area of medicine. Superstition was as much a part of medicine as the actual remedies themselves. The use of leeches and bleeding was still common, the reason being to "let out the bad blood," which was in the same category with getting rid of evil spirits. Even drilling holes in the skull - the art of trephination - which
had been around since the time of the Pharaohs, was still done.

In Europe and America, the “night air” was thought to bear the noxious spirits of disease. Many a sickroom was sealed off tight, sometimes in the daytime as well. This superstition persists today, in places that might surprise you.

Surgery came about from the mechanistic outlook: if a part became too big a problem, cut it off. Quickly, before it gets a chance to heal. If the patient survives, that means the surgeon “saved his life.” Surgery through the ages has been associated with a surprising lack of scientific foundation. In Europe, from the Middle Ages to the Renaissance, surgeons and barbers were the same people. It was not until the time of the American Revolution that England’s King George the Third decreed that barbers and surgeons were two separate professions. The deification of surgeons, complete with Boxster and villa on the Côte D’Azur - this is only a recent development.

For another view on how civilized and “scientific” surgery is, one might read the descriptions of lobotomies which are graphically cited in Wiseman’s Psychiatry: the Ultimate Betrayal. You won’t believe you are reading about something that has taken place in this country during this century (spike through the eye?) {see p. 9] To treat a body part in isolation can be very dangerous, because of the complexity of interrelationships within the body, and our limited knowledge of the whole picture.

Or a jammed tailbone left out of place for years may cause infertility by interfering with nerve transmission to sex organs - simple biomechanics.

Or antibiotics. As we saw in Chapter 3 on antibiotic resistance ( ANTIBIOTICS ) treating a minor infection with powerful antibiotics can disrupt both the digestive and immune systems, since they require normal bacteria.

Examples are endless, but the point is that if no one is looking at the Big Picture, treatment can easily get sidetracked by chasing symptoms - just treating the part that hurts, in isolation, pretending that only that part is affected. Meanwhile the underlying cause gets a chance to really become entrenched. Lot of wasted time. Couple of years go by, and the patient has an irreversible disease, the simple result of Nobody Driving the Bus.

By contrast, holistic healers, or vitalists, consider the entire body as a group of interrelated, interdependent systems. No single part exists or can be treated in isolation. The whole thing is greater than the sum of its parts. Diseases are seen as general conditions that have localized, after a slow, gradual process, perhaps years of neglect. Vitalists seek to encourage the body’s innate life forces by common sense means - pure air, pure water, pure food, functioning nervous system, clean blood.

The holistic outlook realizes that after centuries of dissecting and treating and theorizing, what we actually know about the body’s innermost workings is only rudimentary, at best. This may account for the abysmal failure of drug therapy for degenerative conditions, which comprise 80% of all disease - arthritis, hypertension, cancer, chronic fatigue, colitis, on and on.

Nobel laureate Alexis Carrel puts it this way:

“There are diseases of the stomach, of the heart, of the nervous system, etc., but in illness the body preserves the same unity as in health. It is sick as a whole. No disturbance remains strictly confined to a single organ. Physicians have been led to consider each disease as a specialty by the old anatomical conception of the human being. Only those who know man both in his parts and in his entirety are capable of understanding him when he is sick.”

- Man, The Unknown p79


History’s most famous nurse had an even simpler opinion:

“The specific disease doctrine is the grand refuge of weak, uncultured, unstable minds, such as now rule in the medical profession. There are no specific diseases; there are specific disease conditions.”
- Florence Nightengale, 1860


One of the finest surgeons of his day, Carrel (p75) explains the profound and fundamental difference between the body and a machine, by naming the bridge which allopathy will never cross: embryology. Huh? That’s right. All the cells of the adult body evolved from the union of two original cells, and therefore share a common DNA, a common version of life. The OJ Simpson trial has acquainted the lay public with the implications of DNA identity from the minutest traces. Because of this commonality among the cells of one person’s body, even if the cells are found in totally different tissues, there is a communication and a connection at levels about which science can only guess, at this time. Machines have parts which are made of many different substances, possibly collected from a variety of locations across the face of the earth. The parts of the body all came from exactly the same place and have exactly the same genetic blueprint. No machine can know itself, repair itself, or replicate itself. No machine ever built a human.

THE GERM THEORY

The idea here is that bugs from somewhere outside the body invade it and make it sick and require certain drugs to make the body better again. In the chapter on antibiotics we will see why this idea became so popular so fast. Starting with Louis Pasteur, then to Alexander Fleming, down to modern chemotherapy and the quest for the Holy Grail cure for AIDS, we find that rich rewards have always motivated those licensed to manufacture, sell, and prescribe THEORETICAL cures for disease. Not real actual cures, but drugs that are supposed to cure diseases, because that’s the theory. The Germ Theory. The promise of untold riches then enlisted the opinion makers, those who decide what spin to put on reality - the main ones today being the editors of the New York Times and the Washington Post, the Tavistock Institute, United Press International and Associated Press, who set the tone for the rest of the country. (Ruesch, Coleman, Horowitz)

That’s how we know what the drugs are supposed to do. Because we read it in the newspaper, or a magazine or worse yet, in an AD in the newspaper or magazine. Unsurpassable dog-wagging, par excellence.

Holistic doctors like Dr. Dean Black explain that viruses don’t cause flu any more than freeways cause accidents. The responsible variable for getting the flu is not the presence or absence of virus, but rather the strength or weakness of the individual’s immune resistance. (Health At the Crossroads p18) Obviously two people can be living with the same sick person who has the flu. The virus has the same access to both people, but only the weak one will get the flu. They both got exposed to the virus, and that’s the point: the virus doesn’t cause the flu. A depressed immune system does. The terrain, not the germ, as Pasteur himself finally admitted on his deathbed, when there were no more awards or money to be gained.

MILITARY VS. NURTURING

[See p.12] ... enemy pathogens, radium implants, palladium implants, cut out the diseased organ, conquer bacteria, gain victory over illness, annihilate the bad cells, on and on. Except for the 40 years of antibiotic success, now coming to a conclusion, the military approach hasn’t been that successful.

Media hype always talks about the progress we’re making and that “breakthrough” cures are right around the corner, but in reality our nation’s health is one of the worst of all industrialized countries in the world, as we will see. Our infant mortality is appalling. We are #22 on the world list. John Robbins cites that babies in the U.S. have a better chance of survival if they are born in taxicabs than if they make it to the hospital! (Robbins, p. 302)

Cancer incidence, heart disease, and now infectious disease rates are all on the rise in the U.S., when the raw data is confronted. (Chapter 17)

We’re not winning, we’re not overcoming disease. Worse yet, the eradication of disease was never even a goal of organized medicine. Too many natural cures have been suppressed and buried over the past 75 years to entertain the illusion that the goal of medicine is health. (The Cancer Industry) The goal of medicine is more medicine, i.e., wealth. It is a market-driven industry, and any idea that stands in the way of profit is fair game for persecution and attack. This story is told in some detail in works by Ralph Moss and Leonard Horowitz, among many others.

Nurturing, by contrast, is a holistic concept. It means employing methods which are gentle, minute, and slow acting, working to support the innate systems of the body instead of arrogantly overpowering them.

Holistic foods and supplements try to match the low intensity of the natural healing efforts of the body. We’re talking low tech here; less is more. A nurturing approach to heart disease, for example, would be a cleansing diet, low in dairy and harmful fats, along with gentle antioxidant and enzyme supplements to help break down arterial plaque. Holistic methods never have harmful side effects. They work to detox the system, on the cellular level, and support cell nutrition, using whole food vitamins, minerals, enzymes, live foods, and selected herbs. In this way the disease condition is naturally, gradually rejected and not allowed to co-exist in the vitalizing, healing biological terrain.

DRUGS V. FOOD

Dr. Dean Black talks about two things that happen every time we take a drug:

what the drug does to the body
¨ how the body adapts to the drug.


This is called the Bi-Phasic Effect. For example, there are two main types of heart drugs: beta blockers and calcium channel blockers, but they both do the same thing: inhibit the heart muscle from “pumping too hard.” That’s the first phase: block the muscle. What happens next is the body’s response: it slows down. The body’s overall oxygen demands haven’t changed, but the drug is preventing those demands from being met. The tissues can’t get the oxygen they need for normal cell nutrition, so they stop building and they stop repairing normally, as the body learns that it’s not going to be getting any more oxygen from the blood. That’s Phase Two. Result: gradual overall loss of strength, tissue breakdown. Ever know any people who got healthier or stronger or got completely better while they were taking heart medication?

[See p.14] ...the pancreas shuts down totally since it no longer senses any sugar in the blood which would require it to make insulin. Short-term benefit, long-term weakening.

A third example: chemotherapy. The theory of this powerful toxin for “attacking” tumors is the illusion used as The Closer every time the procedure is sold to a frightened, panicked cancer patient: that this poison will kill the tumor. Two problems with that. First, no chemotherapy has ever been invented that is specific for the tumor. The whole body is poisoned. That’s why people get sick, lose their hair, and their digestive systems. Second problem is exactly the Bi-Phasic Effect: the tumor regresses a little, but when the chemo wears off, the tumor returns with a vengeance. By now many, many people have had some family experience with this phenomenon. Know what we’re talking about? ( CANCER )

Medical history up until the late 1800s is a long list of bizarre, toxic poisons, with a healthy sprinkling of incantation and superstition for good measure. An amazing chronicle by Morris Bealle documents a pharmacopeia of wacky concoctions that allopaths through the ages tricked their gullible patients into swallowing:


pigeon dung
grasshopper sputum
antimony (a poison)
pitch
nutmeg
dried beetles (given to George Washington the night he died)
hog’s lice
sheep droppings
dried skunk bellies
powdered fox lungs
powdered human skull
viper’s flesh
saliva from a fasting person
lead
mercury
rhinoceros skin
putrid elephant flesh

- Bealle, p154 ff


This is just a partial list. Makes Shakespeare’s reference to “eye of newt and toe of frog” in Macbeth appealing by comparison. The above items were mainstays of practice, not weird oddities somebody looked up. About half the items on this list are from a Pharmacopeia that is less than two hundred years old, so it’s not all from the Dark Ages. But look at the modern similarities:

· gold salts for rheumatoid arthritis - only recently given up

· Premarin, the #1 synthetic estrogen drug in the world, made from horse urine!

· vaccines still made from pus from horses, cows, sheep,
rabbits and monkeys (Horowitz)

· synthetic cyanocobalamin (Vit. B12) from deactivated
sewage

· vast majority of pharmaceuticals derived from coal tar and petroleum (Bealle)

· chemotherapy drugs from nitrogen mustard
(like the poison gas)

· the 4,000 poisons tested to find the 50 or so modern
chemotherapy drugs (Moss)


How far have we really progressed?

Pharmaceutical drugs artificially alter the systems of the body in one of two primary ways:

slow down system operations
¨ accelerate system operations.


Does this have anything to do with a return to health? Rarely.

[See p. 16] In Morris Bealle’s amazing narrative, we find that the idea of JD Rockefeller to create an entire industry of “medicines” from industrial waste heaps - this notion was inspired by his father William Rockefeller, way back in the 1860s. The original snake oil salesman complete with travelling wagon, “Old Bill” used to sell country people bottles of raw petroleum as a cure for cancer! (Bealle p5) A New York farmer, William had himself listed as a physician in the Cleveland directory when he moved there from upstate in 1850. (Chernow)

OLD BILL AND NUJOL

The bottled petroleum was variously hawked as a cure for liver problems, cholera, TB, bronchitis, and of course, cancer. Rockefeller called the product Nujol. It cost $2 a barrel to make Nujol from crude petroleum. Incredibly, this product continued to be manufactured and sold until the late 1940s by a branch of Standard Oil called Stanco, Inc. in New York. At one point they actually added carotene to Nujol because someone figured out that drinking this crude petroleum derivative depleted the body of vitamins! Royal Copeland, health commissioner of New York City, made a fortune selling Nujol on the radio, and later became a US Senator. (Bealle)

Most modern pharmaceuticals are made from coal tar and petroleum derivatives, as well as are many over the counter “medicines,” like Vaseline Petroleum Jelly, and also many synthetic supplements. So there is a natural historical progression from William Rockefeller’s Nujol to JD Rockefeller’s drug empire, in all its convoluted intertwinings, linking coal, railroads, oil, and gasoline with medical education, drug manufacturing, the insurance cartel, and international banking. Before the antitrust decision of 1911, Rockefeller controlled 90% of the country’s oil industry. This is the subject of Chernow’s work: Titan: The Life of John D Rockefeller. Oil to drugs, oil to drugs - for them, it was a natural.

THE POLITICS OF HEALTH

Let’s go back a little further. Since the time of the earliest shamans and witch doctors and healers, it became apparent that the control of health and sickness was a position of power. [See p. 17]

What happened? How did the allopathic drug-and-surgery approach gain such an ascendancy over holistic medicine in such a short time? Why do people today think that only pharmaceutical drugs and expensive, dangerous hospital procedures and surgeries are the only “scientific” health care? Because one school of thought competed for acceptance, and ultimately gained the upper hand, by the usual means: representing the big money, lobbying for influence, patronage, kickbacks, hiding the failures, and extolling the successes, and most of all, by controlling the publishing industry and the lawmakers.

Allopathic mindset controls American health care today. The largest medical budget in the history of the world - $1.2 trillion per year - is controlled by powerful interests who have a drug for every symptom and multiple drugs for every illness. The story of how allopathic power gained ascendancy over natural healing methods is a fascinating, colorful story, perhaps one of the best-kept secrets of modern times. The story has been kept out of mainstream media and therefore out of mainstream awareness. But the evidence is there, right below the surface and can be uncovered with just a little research and persistence. For more historical background, please refer to the chapter on antibiotics.

SHORT VERSION OF WHY THINGS STAY THIS WAY

Down through the decades, clear-thinking authors who can’t be bought are routinely suppressed and forgotten, “dashed to bits on the rocks,” as Goethe would put it. Henry Lindlahr, JH Tilden, Antoine Bechamp, Edward Howell, Harvey Wiley, Weston Price, Gunter Enderlein, Max Gerson, Royal Lee, Alexis Carrel, Otto Warburg, Stan Bynum - who knows these names today? These guys were some of the finest doctors who ever drew breath, for the simple reason that they really lived in pursuit of health for their patients, not money and fame for themselves or new ways of brainwashing people to act as guinea pigs for the latest drugs. In general, their work was buried with them. The boys who were running things, with profit as their only goal, had no use for doctors whose main concern was the health of their patients.

Today health is not the focus of health care. With Managed Care taking over in the 90s, the whole system is no longer run by doctors. It's run by corporate execs, MBAs, trained to one objective: profit. Today the researcher who advances is the one who comes up with new drugs or new tests or new “proof” for existing drugs. Today the name of the game is Crowd Control. An art mastered.


A very powerful summary of how the Whole Enchilada was set up may be found in a 1992 masterwork that is already out of print and difficult to find: The Naked Empress by Hans Ruesch. It is no accident that this book and its predecessor Slaughter of the Innocent cannot be found in bookstores at the mall. Ruesch tells the story that the puppeteers don’t want people to know about, with meticulous documentation and undeniable backup. It is the story of the original alliance among

· the German and American chemical giants
· the Swiss and American pharmaceutical giants
· the Rockefeller/Hearst media and publication empire
· and supporting acts like the AMA, Congress, the FDA,
the FTC, British Parliament, and the WHO

Morris Bealle further explains how Rockefeller saw his chance to shape the entire infrastructure


¨ by standardizing the content of medical education throughout the country

¨ by giving huge grants to the major drug companies

¨ by taking control of Hearst’s publishing empire, which was then on the verge of bankruptcy


WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY

When looking at the evolution of the American “health care” system, we see that an opportunity arose, never before available to any other gang in history. From the beginning, organized medicine, i.e.:

· Rockefeller oil interests
· medical education
· hospital groups
· medical doctors
· drug companies
· and the AMA

sought to be exclusionary of all other health care systems, and to destroy them whenever possible. No monopoly of this magnitude had ever been possible before on such a scale. Why? Medicine was something that could be used, that could be plugged right into the colossal Rockefeller infrastructure and be fed by the imponderable financial and political resources available to the greatest fortune ever assembled in the history of the world at that time. It couldn’t miss!

Were people less healthy 100 years ago? Not really. Cancer was practically unknown in the 1800s, with an incidence of less than 5 per 100,000. Heart disease had a similar incidence: the word “heart attack” was unknown. Degenerative diseases were a tiny fraction of what they are today. Infectious diseases, like smallpox and tuberculosis, that had been the scourge of the human race for so many centuries were on the decline, long before mass inoculations were required, primarily because of improvements in sanitation. (Michael Alderson)

During most of the past 100 years now, the prevailing allopathic view has been able to convince people that it is normal to be born in a hospital, get an array of childhood diseases that require treatment with drugs and vaccines, experience any number of mysterious "growing pains" until maturity, then gradually begin a process of degeneration and decline, punctuated by the appearance of specific "diseases" which each demands one or more drugs to "keep it under control," experience any number of mysterious "old age" pains, and then finally when the body has endured all these diseases, it ultimately collapses in decay and ruination, a victim of its ‘natural’ course of decline.

The allopathic view has convinced American women that menopause is a medical condition, that childbirth is a medical emergency, and that the uterus and the ovaries have no use after child-bearing years. The allopathic view has convinced parents that antibiotics should be given to children at the slightest sign of a cold, even though there are no drugs for viral infections, which cause the vast majority of colds. The allopathic view has convinced most people that death itself is a medical emergency, a medical condition that must be monitored, controlled, and regulated; in America today people may not die without their doctor’s permission, because so many procedures may be billed for right up to the end. The gateways to and from life itself seem to have been claimed as the private property and domain of one special type of health care.

All these ideas are insane.


WHY ARE DRUGS ALWAYS SYNTHETIC CHEMICALS?

The word synthetic in this context means two simultaneous things:

· manmade
· found nowhere in nature

If a natural substance, such as the progesterone found in the wild yam, for example, is found to have some therapeutic value, a chemical copy of it will be derived, usually from completely unnatural, synthetic chemical sources. Despite its obvious therapeutic superiority, the natural compound itself will virtually never be used by drug companies, for one and only one reason: it is not patentable.

This is the central focus of the entire pharmaceutical industry: patentability. Huge profits only come from a product for which ownership can be claimed. If a compound occurs naturally, it is easily available and inexpensive, and no one can say he invented it. To understand this simple idea is to get a first glimpse of the most controlled, organized system of legislated drugging in the history of the world. Fortunes are amassed at the expense of our national health, our individual health, our children’s health, and the lives of those hundreds of thousands who die every year from prescription drugs.

[See p. 23]


Great care was taken to camouflage big German money tied up with Rockefeller interests, what with WWII in full swing. But Bealle tells one unforgettable story that leaves no doubt of the alliance. (p9) Right before the American invasion of Germany, American bombers were flying nightly raids on Germany’s big industrial cities. American aviators were under strict orders to ‘surgically’ protect the huge IG Farben chemical plant in the middle of Frankfurt. Indeed, when our grounds troops went in, they found the plant untouched, even though all around it, the rest of Frankfurt was in total devastation from thousands and thousands of American bombs.

Think of the power behind such an order - from the industrialists to the Cabinet to the military commanders to the pilots.

After the war, the real gravy train began between the chemical and the pharmaceuticals industries, as orchestrated by the Rockefeller organization. Huge endowments were made to some 200 major drug companies by the Rockefeller circle (Ruesch), among them:

Lever Brothers
Colgate Palmolive
Procter & Gamble
Sterling Drug
Swift & Company
Miles Laboratories
Bristol Meyers
- Bealle, p 31


As the war was winding down, Operation Paperclip was set into motion under Henry Kissinger - a program of smuggling the best scientific minds of the Third Reich into the U.S., giving them new identities and new positions in American biomedicine and science. (Horowitz)

Bealle lists the following universities endowed by Rockefeller between 1915 and 1945:

Harvard Medical School
Johns Hopkins
Stanford
Columbia University
Duke
Tufts
New York University
Cornell

With all this money floating around, it is notable that in all this century, not one dime of all Rockefeller’s billions was ever given to a school or a researcher involved with natural healing methods, those that did not sell drugs.

Any more questions why drugs are always synthetic chemicals? These are interlocking empires. Bealle goes on further to list the directors of many of these drug companies, chemical companies, universities, and banking institutions and shows what a spider’s web can be drawn. The set-up is very complex, but with an overriding control. This chapter only hints at the extent of the forces involved. The reader is directed to Ruesch and Bealle and Horowitz for a reality check you won’t find in Reader’s Digest.

SIDE EFFECTS

Just another Medspeak term. Chemicals don’t have side effects in the human body; they just have effects. Using the term ‘side effect’ is pretending that the drug actually had the one main effect it was supposed to have, and all these other responses are just extraneous, minor reactions. The body doesn’t think like that. All its systems work together in a complex symphony of sophisticated chemical reactions and defenses. When a drug comes in, everything happens at once: most of the energy is expended trying to neutralize the drug and to isolate it and get rid of it. The reason for this is simple: drugs don’t cure disease. No matter what you read, diseases are not drug deficiencies. In the body, drugs are simply toxic, foreign chemicals.

According to the Journal of the American Medical Association, Apr 1998, side effects to prescription drugs are now at least the FOURTH leading cause of death in the United States! (Lazarou) This amazing study escaped the attention of mainstream media, for obvious reasons. The researchers did a meta-analysis, comparing 39 different studies of drug side effects. This was only the second meta-analysis ever done in mortality from drug side effects. Their findings:

· At least 106,000 Americans die from drug reactions every year

· At least 2.21 million Americans have adverse drug reactions requiring hospitalization.

The researchers emphasized that these figures are only for drugs which are “properly prescribed and properly administered,” and only takes into account hospitalized patients! This does not even include the thousands of other deaths from wrong prescriptions and errors in administration, or patients who are at home.

The study probably does not portray an accurate picture of the true numbers involved, according to JAMA’s own editor David Bates, in an editorial appearing on p.1216 of the same issue. Why not? Because of routine underreporting of adverse incidents by hospital staff, in order to avoid scrutiny from regulators and patient attorneys. Stands to reason. Bates actually estimates that as few as 1 in 20 adverse drug reactions actually gets reported! Using stats like that could easily make adverse drugs reactions the #1 cause of death in the US, which may actually be true. But since there’s really no way to track it, they backed off and just stuck with fourth place. And this is JAMA, not the Chiropractic Report or some New Age newsletter from Santa Cruz.

Different studies give different figures. The famous Ralph Nader study of 1993 put the figure at 168,000, saying the same thing, that this was a minimum estimate. Whatever the figures, we’re starting to get the idea that drugs may not be conducive to longevity.

Any doctor will tell you that all drugs have side effects. What he may not tell you is that most drugs have only side effects. Except for life-threatening conditions, most drugs impose an additional burden upon the body which usually hinders its efforts to cleanse itself. Rarely is it a good trade to exchange the side effect for the shaky, short-term benefit of a body on drugs.

Another problem is cross side effects, also called interactions. Let’s say a person is taking medications for two separate conditions, each being treated by a separate physician. The side effects of the two drugs together may not be simply additive - just piling on top of each other.
They may be geometric - meaning that in the presence of the second drug, the first drug’s side effects are multiplied by a factor of many times. The result may be death.

In an article called “Deadly Drug Duos” the author gives several examples of potentially fatal interactions:

v!agra + nitroglycerine = death

Warfarin (an anticoagulant, or blood thinner) + NSAIDS
(Tylenol, Advil, etc.) = internal bleeding

Tagamet + digoxin (a heart drug) = heart attack

Erythromycin + Halcion (antidepressant) = overdose

Erythromycin (a common antibiotic) + Seldane (an
antihistamine) = heart attack


This combination killed so many people that Seldane was finally removed from the market in Dec 97.

[See p.26]
What does the Hippocratic Oath really mean, when you reflect that Hippocrates, the Father of Medicine himself said,

“I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel.”


Anyone ever look at the Physicians’ Desk Reference? 3200 pages of side effects. There seems to be some conflict here, what do you think?

FAIR WARNING? INSERT THIS

The newest trick in the Deniability Department is the insert. Here's how it works: there are so many side effects and so many new drugs coming out that doctors cannot possibly keep up with all the data. Many drugs have deadly effects if used in combination with other drugs, or if used on people who have certain conditions. So the FDA has given the drug companies a break, which is the quite the same as saying they're giving themselves a break, because the FDA members ARE the drug companies. They have decreed that if the manufacturer prints all the dangerous information - the side effects, interactions, and other warnings - in a #1 font on a tiny piece of paper that folds up into the bottle of drugs - this constitutes Fair Warning. Oh yes, and the manufacturer must also send each doctor a letter telling about the insert.

The problem is that less than 1% of physicians ever read the insert! (Rubin) Four major drugs had to be pulled off the market in the past two years because too many people were dying who would not have died had the physician read the insert. These drugs are:

Rezulin
Posicor
Duract
Propulsid


The last of these remained on the market until Aug 2000, even though many deaths had occurred from its use. The same happened with the other three drugs - they remained on the market for up to a year after FDA had found out that people were dying by taking them. Why?

"There are very strong economic and political pressures when a company has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to develop a drug."
- Jerry Avorn, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston
USA Today,, 3 May 00


Always the money - what a shock.

These drugs represent a pattern of economic behavior that now controls FDA policy: i.e., as long as all the complicated instructions are in microprint on the label insert, the drug will be put out on the market, even though it may cause liver failure, aplastic anemia, heart failure, or death. Then when enough people have died or have required liver transplants or other serious interventions, the drug is SCHEDULED to be pulled off the market. And then months or a year later, the drug actually comes off the market. (Rubin) But often only the domestic market - the drug may still be sold abroad!

This insane system is actually the vehicle by which so many drugs come and go every year in the American drug market.

THE SECRET HORROR OF DRUG RESEARCH

In Chapter 16 on synthetic estrogen, HRT you will read about the barbaric, infernal torture to which millions of horses continue to be subject at this time, in the preparation of the dangerous and unproven drug Premarin.

In sales, this is one of the top five drugs in the U.S. - a billion dollars per year. Reading that chapter and then checking its sources, the reader is better prepared to suspect the truth of the prodigious research conducted by Hans Ruesch and presented in his books Naked Empress and Slaughter of the Innocent.

Ruesch proves with hundreds of references that the standard research method in the pharmaceutical industry, since the time of Louis Pasteur and Claude Bernard, has been vivisection. Vivisection is a collective term that means the cutting and poisoning and shocking and beating and starving and decapitating and denervating and any other torture that man has ever devised, of defenseless animals, for “medical research.” No anesthetic. We call them “laboratory animals” so that we can pretend they are somehow lesser beings than our own household pets.

With unrelenting data, Ruesch tells the shocking story of how animal research has always been the Prime Alibi for testing drugs, for the past century. It’s a regulatory, legal thing - before drugs can be approved by the FDA, they have to be “tested” for certain periods of time and to certain specifications. And since these are potentially toxic chemicals, we wouldn’t want to test them on humans, now would we?

So that leaves animals: rats, horses, dogs, mice, cats, monkeys, apes, etc. Millions and millions of all these species have been sliced, diced, caged, poisoned, etc. in specific “studies” which have specific “conditions” that will supposedly teach us all about a drug and what it will do to a human once it is approved and marketed. We are brainwashed to accept such a set-up with mindless mantras like “better sacrifice a rat than a child” etc.

Ruesch exposes the follies and fallacies of the whole monstrous system, with facts and principles which cannot be challenged. In the first place, animal physiology is entirely different from human. No one in his right mind would give a household pet a human drug, because it might kill the animal or make it sick, right? And why is that? Different physiologies. Ruesch gives example after example of substances that are harmless to animals but fatal to humans, and vice versa. That much is obvious.

Next, Ruesch explains about the money. It’s billions, and it’s all over the place. It’s in procurement of the animals from nature, or raising them in the labs. It’s in research grants for drug “testing.” It’s in medical publications. It’s in careers for hundreds of thousands of researchers. It’s in sweetheart arrangements with regulating agencies, who control a drug’s approval. It’s in politics, and legal arrangements which control drugs and their “safety” and “proof of efficacy.” It’s in the billions in profit a drug company can make once a drug has been approved and effectively marketed. It’s in advertising. It’s in medical education and training.

It’s in vaccines.

Any m*o*o*n knows that animal testing of drugs for humans is meaningless and a waste of time because of different physiologies. This simple fact is borne out by the dozens of drugs that are taken off the market every year once it becomes impossible to hide the number of deaths and side effects occurring in humans. Ruesch cites many researchers who state the exact same thing - that the tests they have conducted are irrelevant to the effect of a drug on humans. They also state how the same tests are often conducted over and over, year after year, killing more and more animals, even though the outcomes are already known. Redundancy, legal CYA stuff. Or else just padding or extending a research grant.

NOT NICE TO FOOL WITH MOTHER NATURE

What is less commonly known, but becoming more and more undeniable, is that nature is beginning to balance itself, to reciprocate, to retaliate against us for having gone against her for so many decades by killing all these innocent animals. To cite just one example, there’s SV-40. For the complete story, look in Chapter 2 - The Sanctity of Human Blood ( VACCINES ). SV-40 is a virus which is normal in monkeys, but not in man. Different physiology, remember? In the 1950s, polio vaccines were being prepared how? In Africa, using the kidneys of 50,000 monkeys. Those monkey kidneys had SV-40, which never bothered the monkeys. But though we may be descended from the ape, we have evolved major differences in physiology. Researchers estimate a minimum of 10 million doses of that polio vaccine were given to people before anyone even knew what SV-40 was. (Horowitz) SV-40 has a latency period in humans of about 25 years. So let’s see, what new disease popped up in the human species in the 1980s, which now is present in some 30 million people? (See Horowitz)

THE STANDARD COVER-UP: THE INFILTRATORS

Now PC tells us how uncool it is to be mean to animals. In some places you can be arrested for shooting a cat with a BB gun. Hollywood actors get a lot of mileage protesting this or that animal cause or spotted owl crisis, or this or that media event. [See p. 28]

Ruesch points out how anti-vivisectionist views are dealt with by the Thought Police who control publications and media in this country. First of all, his books, which are pivotal works in the area of drugs and animal testing, are out of print and can only be found with difficulty. Big surprise.

But worse, Ruesch shows how those whose fortunes are dependent on vivisection - the systematic killing of lab animals - have insidiously infiltrated the animal rights organizations and de-fused them by a very effective method. (p 39) These infiltrators ally themselves with the anti-vivisectionists. And since they are better trained and better funded, they beat the real animal rights people at their own game. The infiltrators pretend they’re on the side of the poor animals, and they actually disagree with animal experimentation in every way except medical. From a moral standpoint, from an ethical standpoint, from an economic standpoint, these phony “animal rights” people will object to animal experimentation. But they’re very well trained, and they will never object from a medical standpoint. They won’t talk about different physiologies, and endless repetition of tests and falsified data and how the test outcomes don’t mean anything. That way when the mainstream speakers come in and talk about how animals are humanely treated, and always put to sleep painlessly, and how important it is to test animals instead of people, most listeners will just be confused and figure that animal testing is a necessary evil, if they care at all in the first place. In this way the real issues of mass torture and mutilation which continue year after year, are never brought forward. It is brilliant.

In the movie Wall Street, Gordon Gekko tells Bud that he should always remember something about WASPS. They love animals, but they hate people. Maybe Gordo should stick to LBO’s.

Just because we invented Palm Pilots, violins, Honda RC30s, Best of Greens, laser surgery, and Cabo San Lucas doesn’t necessarily mean that we are the superior species on this planet, and that we can do whatever we want and get away with it. We also invented global war, AIDS, lawyers, sewage, county government, thalidomide, HMOs, Muzak, commuter lanes, and TV sitcoms.

In the area of mass murder of animals, Ruesch’s works stand alone in scope and verifiability. And they’re buried. These days few people know the whole story, and those who do simply have no platform from which they may be heard. Don’t believe this chapter at face value; follow up. Check references.

1000 ROTTING BUFFALOES

The guy they named Seattle after, Chief Sealth had his own ideas:

“The white man must treat the beasts of this land as his brother. I am a savage and I do not understand the other way. I have seen a thousand rotting buffaloes on the prairies, left by the white man who shot them from a passing train….What is man without the beasts? If all the beasts were gone, man would die from great loneliness of spirit, for whatever happens to the beast, also happens to man. All things are connected. Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of earth.”

- quoted by Dufty, p. 116



Think we’re going to get away clean? Mother Nature Always Bats Last.

FOOD

is a much safer healing remedy than drugs, with rare exception. Hippocrates also said

“Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food.”

Fairly straightforward - nothing about Prozac or fen-phen in there. Maybe they didn’t have Taco Bell in ancient Athens…Or Long’s Drugs...

With food, there is no rebound Bi-Phasic Effect. There’s only one single nurturing effect. Instead of altering body systems the way drugs do, nutrients activate and support those systems.

Don’t let’s complicate things - let’s keep it on a cellular level. Humans are groups of a few trillion or so cells. Cell membrane, cytoplasm, DNA, organelles - these are the cooperating parts of a living cell. A cell needs two things in order to operate indefinitely: nutrients and waste removal. Diminish either, and cell life is shortened. Obviously we will last only as long as our cells. Remember the famous Alexis Carrel experiment where he kept chicken liver cells alive in a petri dish for 28 years just by adding nutrients and removing wastes, every day.

So the food that we take into our mouth should contain nutrients, to feed the cells. Nutrients include vitamins, minerals, enzymes, water, oxygen - cool stuff like that. Real food has all these, carried on a framework of fiber. Thus is the cell nourished. The only wastes in our body should be cellular wastes: the by-products of cell metabolism, cell life-functions. These small waste molecules can easily be removed through the blood and lymph systems, with virtually no stress on the body. There should be no wastes left over from the food itself. Waste like that is the big problem - the cause of aging and degeneration and cell breakdown. With modern processed food, the foods of commerce, often more than half of it is indigestible, inert, clogging waste, which lodges anywhere it can:

· the joints
· the blood
· any organ
· the skin
· the colon
· the muscles

Real food nourishes and cleanses. Real medicine. No side effects; no debris left over, no toxicity.

Food is a different kind of medicine from drugs. Food is medicine we take when we’re well - in order to stay well, in order to build our reserves of immunity and resilience. Its effects are slow and mild and cumulative. Each day of health is an opportunity to load up on vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and usable nutrients and to make deposits in the Health Account. Following this paradigm, people get healthier as they get older, not sicker, the way we’ve been led to believe through Rockefeller-type media control.

Classical Chinese herbology, which is the basis for acupuncture, has always divided herbs into two groups:


· food herbs, (kingly or superior)
· medicinal herbs (assistants)

Food herbs, like echinacea, carrots, radishes, etc., can be eaten all the time, with no Bi-Phasic Effect where the body reacts. Medicinal herbs, like goldenseal and a thousand others, produce a mild controlling effect, and therefore are only to be used temporarily. (Black p87) Herbology is a very complex subject, and has been around for several millennia longer than modern synthetic pharmaceutical theory. When you hear somebody talking “about the dangers of herbs” implying they should be avoided entirely, it generally seems to be someone with no background whatsoever in herbal therapy.

If we should get sick, that’s the time to stop eating and give the body a chance to catch up with its detoxification efforts. Years ago, Colorado’s famed JH Tilden, MD put it this way:

“It is a crime to feed anything to the sick. No food should be given until all symptoms are gone…The life of the patient depends upon getting rid of the putrid food still remaining in the bowels, before enough putrescence is absorbed to cause death."

- Toxemia Explained p 99


...

Hippocrates himself concurs:

“As in the blood, so is the man - he is just as weak, just as strong.”


The big difference between foods and drugs, especially when talking about chronic, degenerative disease is that only foods can heal because only foods rely on the inner healing systems of the body by providing simple gentle, support in physiologic doses. Drugs which overpower the delicate interwoven systems of the body can never bring health long-term, because they come in huge powerful pharmacologic doses, toxic by their very nature.

THE AMERICAN MADNESS ASSOCIATION

The political branch of the allopathic powers in the U.S. is called the AMA. The American Medical Association is the second largest lobby in Washington, right behind oil. (AMA News, 8 Jun 79) Researching its history, one is taken by the idea that the AMA is not concerned with health, longevity or improved quality of life for the American people. The AMA is a political body, a trade lobby, nothing more. Its pretension in presenting itself as a synonym for the medical profession, or the power that governs American medicine is something John Robbins says would be like the American Bar Association calling itself the American Justice Association. (Robbins p96)

The AMA is a voluntary organization and has no legal authority over medical doctors. The AMA, as any trade lobby, is focused on one thing and one thing only: increased profits and power for its constituents - its members, the drug cartels and the hospital associations. The AMA is a media octopus, whose control is pervasively felt in newspaper opinions, magazines, medical journals, medical textbooks, TV, the FDA, the FTC, the insurance industry, and in especially in Congress. We’re not talking about influence here; we’re talking about control. Big difference.

Media octopus? That’s right. Every day the AMA sends one minute messages to 5,000 radio stations; every week the AMA sends news releases to some 4,000 “scientific” journalists. (Robbins, p182). JAMA is the most widely read and accepted of all U.S. medical journals, with a circulation of over 750,000. Quite a feat for a trade union publication, wouldn’t you say? Think this type of pervasive influencing has anything to do with the constant stream of “breakthrough” drugs and procedures we’re always hearing about on radio, TV, and the newspapers, disguised as hard news?

[See p33]
The AMA’s first real leader, Morris Fishbein, never graduated from medical school and never practiced medicine a day in his life. His credentials were all political. (Bealle) His focus was simple: end medical freedom in the U.S. Any natural cure, or holistic therapies that did not involve the sale of pharmaceuticals or the advancement of surgery were suppressed, maligned, and actively persecuted by Fishbein’s attack dogs - the FDA and the FTC. For decades holistic healers and cures were vilified and crushed. That story is told in some detail in Lisa’s Assault on Medical Freedom, and also in Bealle’s The Drug Story. This is a dark chapter in mankind’s history; the more you find out about it the less you want to know. It’s not really paranoia or fostering negativity but more a spirit of history that pushes us to try and understand the forces in play today, and the fundamental upheaval that strives to achieve some equilibrium from the treachery of the past.

It was Fishbein who arranged the marriage of the medical profession to the tobacco industry, which cozy liaison was to last some forty years. Mr. Fishbein along with Philip Morris, set up the program of cigarette advertising in JAMA which lasted for over 20 years. Also found in old issues of any popular magazine, like Life and Time in the 30s, 40s and 50s, these ads have medical doctors constantly extolling the various benefits of tobacco: good digestion, relaxation, on and on. Ads like


“nine out of ten doctors recommend ______ cigarettes”

were ubiquitous, as any old timer can tell you.

Here’s an ad run in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1933:

“Patients with coughs were instructed to change to Philip Morris cigarettes. In three out of four cases the coughs disappeared entirely.”


Even after studies in 1925 and again in 1938 very clearly showed the link between tobacco and cancer, Fishbein continued to run the ad campaign for many years. (Robbins, 204) That is power. For this favor Fishbein was paid more per year than his salary as director of the AMA. (Rorty)

In Chapter 11 of Reclaiming Our Health, John Robbins has masterfully summarized the meretricious partnership between medicine and tobacco.

Even with lung cancer leading the list of cancers in America today, it’s still easy to see the power of the tobacco/medical industry by reading the disclaimers in cigarette ads. Remember just a few years ago where they had to put “The Surgeon General has determined that smoking is dangerous to your health”? Notice how that has been recently downgraded to the current:

“Surgeon General’s Warning: Quitting Smoking Now Greatly Reduces Serious Risks to Your Health”

These words are very carefully chosen, and change with the winds of politics and compromise. What’s next? “Surgeon General says you really shouldn’t smoke”?

In 1963, the AMA formed the little club which they called “The Committee on Quackery,” [See p. 36]

...
It’s still taking place today with the ongoing 1998 Koren case, in which the Federal Trade Commission, as a front for “unidentified” parties, is trying to change what chiropractic has been for the past 100 years and to muzzle chiropractors from describing the proven benefits of their art. The FTC will probably lose, but with the unlimited funds of the taxpayers’ dollars, the FTC really doesn’t care whether it wins or not. The allopathic political goal is the same as it has always been: to harass and eliminate the purveyors of holistic medicine - anyone involved in the health care field who does not employ drugs and surgery. After this lawsuit is settled, they’ll certainly come up with something else - it hasn’t changed since 1847.

Part Two

In The Raw

Resonance "a vibrational collection"

One

Mentors

Pharma Watch

Recommended Books, Websites, Music and Films

Alternative Health(a-z)

Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites!

Print this page
Email this page
  Alert Webmaster Status: RN Recommended for CureZone Newsletter

Post Your Comment Here      

Attributes associated with this message:
RN Recommended for CureZone Newsletter