Re: Antibiotics - FDA Warning

Newport, you mentioned the Rife machine, perhaps that is another choice too.... I really don't have ENOUGH information on it's effectiveness against Lyme. I also haven't "focused" on Lyme and all of it's variations. It would be fantastic to see more supportive material so that people can research this further. There have been a few posts made on Rife, here - one comes to mind with the micrograph of the blood changes, either on bacteria or fungus. I certainly welcome more supportive materials if you have it.

Let me see if I can explain this from how I'm looking at this a little further.

Monique1 made a great post above and there was the mention of antibiotics. I think sometimes when people see things, they are motivated by fears or think that "this one" is the answer -- does this mean that everyone should go out and get a truckload of pharm antibiotics? I feel we need to think about things more and provide as much information as possible (less on theory/hypothesis) so that people are better informed - with choices.

In your post, Newport, you've made some good points for consideration.

A lot of people know that I've had a terrible experience with the parasite issue, but I think it is worth bringing it up again. I trusted far too many people who didn't have proper information themselves or who have not gotten rid of their own problem. Herbs and alternative therapies were something that I've used for a LONG time, and I've seen them do wonders without any scientific knowledge. However, when it came to the parasites (tricky buggers) I went from a bad deal to horrors; it changed my perception to smarten up quickly by looking at EVERYTHING more critically including things that I would have trusted doing earlier. I had always looked at things with questions and an open-mind, but apparently this time I was not critical enough.... perhaps, it would be better to say that I didn't have enough knowledge, at the time. It was no longer acceptable to me to try this or that, or to experiment with something without scientific back-up. Believe me, even with scientific publications, I QUESTION the validity (discerning good/bad science & agendas) of information because of what I went through (it was the pharm meds that caused the scattering). If the information is hypothetical or iffy or has side-effects, it isn't taken very seriously by me. I'm glad that I've done this because I believe that more damage could have been done especially with the co-factor issue. Already, it will take me a long time to heal from what occurred.

Since I had no experience or knowledge, at the time about parasites, I was relying on others. The trusted herbs that I used didn't work (it also never occurred to me that I could possibly have hundreds or even thousands of invaders). Apparently something was wrong with the information that I had been given because I've heard of few success cases out of the 1000's of people trying the parasite cleanses/flushes on these forums. Where is the forum with 100's claiming they got rid of their parasites? I'm talking about REAL healing - not being "satisfied" or "it came back" or "living with it" -- because that is not a cure to me. In the beginning, I was so confident that the problem would be resolved in no time with the herbs that I was using and familiar with. Reality set in quickly when it didn't work out as I had thought -- weeks turned into months, and months turned into years. For me, I knew the answer early on had to be in SOLID science, not iffy scientific stuff or experimentations that "may" work. For me, I could no longer afford it, my health was already in danger.

Because of my experience, I became interested in knowing what works or doesn't work. I wanted to know WHICH herbs were really tested and on what parasites - scientifically. If there was "good" pharm meds out there, then I was interested in that too. I was no longer trusting the word of people or one article that I read.

The article above was on Lyme. When I look at articles on conditions, I'm not looking at them on a secular level anymore. I'm thinking about other contributing co-factors -- looking at the whole person and their other symptoms. How will a pharm antibiotic treatment help with a hidden fungal or multiple parasite issue that may be present that no one has bothered to look at? If there is a co-parasite issue involved, how will it help get rid of a cancer-like fungal problem if the focus is on parasites and no antifungals are used? These are complicated issues and it seems to me that most diseases or conditions are looked at as a single problem when other possible health issues are being overlooked. Would I call that cure... not necessarily. It maybe a band-aid but a hidden cause eventually rears it ugly head with something "new" or the old "resurfaces". Maybe antibiotics is the answer, but maybe not those antibiotics.

First of all, I'm not completely against total pharm antibiotics because there are times when they are needed during an acute infection in emergency cases, if necessary. I think it would be silly to throw the baby out with the bath water when it is life-threatening and necessary. What I'm against, is the long-term use of antibiotics which can cause serious damage. Instead of scientifically looking into a better protocol, doctors are suggesting that people try some Iffy antibiotic protocol that could do more damage down the road. I feel that this is a BAD medical practices along with doling out false hopes -- to the line the pockets of a few. It has already been proven in a study that AFTER one protocol (7-10 days) of pharm antibiotics they are still working in the body after 6 months of taking them (I made a post on that long time ago). So, what does that tell us after taking one complete dose? Then, people are going to overstimulate their system with a continual, on-going protocol of synthetics? I just don't see how this will be a good thing in the long run. This brings me to something further that I want to point out.

Antibiotics should never, ever be used as a long-term/tonic protocol. Most people don't understand what a tonic is so let me explain. Simply, a tonic is something that is taken over a long period of time to support organs and body functions to assist with healing. Tonics should NOT do more harm, and because of the longevity there should be no side-effects or dependency issue. Tonics are supportive, and not necessarily a curative like other protocols, but this is not to say that tonics can't cure after a long period of use. The WRONG medicines (pharm or herbal) used as a tonic protocol can be dangerous. Tonics are generally taken on a daily basis. The fact that intravenous antibiotics are given may suggest that this preempts a daily intake; hence, one shot could equal a 7-10 day protocol.

IF antibiotics must be taken, why not look toward herbal antibiotics by allowing a natural healing process that can work more synergistically within the body? There are literally thousands of antimicrobial herbs; it really depends on how the formulation is made for efficacy. Of course, it would be more prudent if we looked for a study or two on a natural protocol for Lyme, or look for herbs that have been studied that could be used in a formula. Right? (All pharm drugs use the base material of medicinal herbs to get started with making medicine.)

If it were me and I needed antibiotics, I'd prefer a natural protocol but that's my choice. Once again, this goes back to understanding about antibiotic use, long-term use, and herbal medicines.
Tweet