Re: Science is a cult?

I do not always agree with Jarvis either... however, I believe you know as well as I do that references in medical Science related papers are given to other scientists and or medical professionals for "accepted", in most ALL cases, peer reviewed works.

I believe you are also very aware, as I am from first hand experience, that the works of a no name, a country doctor, or Joe public, be it Jarvis, or whomever, especially those who have held the health of the people above profit and/or job security/recognition, will not be referenced or given credit even IF their work and observations motivated and/or were used as a spring board.

That the above did, or did not occur as it relates to Brownstein, Abraham, et. al. and Jarvis, in this case is hard to tell one way or the other, however, I still would find it VERY hard to believe that these doctors did not run into Jarvis' work before starting their idiosupplementation practices.

If they did not, they did not research the subject very thoroughly and most likely branched directly off of the knowledge of the Iodine patents for fibrocystic breasts, and/or Ghent/Eskin; who by the way played a pivotal role in pharmaceutical Iodine patents, and perhaps Dr. Mauvais-Jarvis, who may have spring-boarded off of the Russians, Vishnyakova and Muravieva et. al. who may have spring-boarded off of, etc. etc., which makes motivation all the more suspect.

It is incorrect to single out, worship, or idolize, one, or a small group of doctors for Iodine and its possible uses in/for human health. As I have stated, references as it relates to fibrocystic breasts and cancer go back a ways. Iodine Pharmaceutical patents go back a ways. That many knew of iodine over the years going back who knows how far and have not been given due credit is a given. That seaweeds have been used medicinally for thousands of years is not in question, though the users may have not known WHY it worked. The questions are, why has this information as it relates to health been suppressed until now if it has been known in professional circles AND there have been patents for iodine for fibrocystic breasts since at least the 80's ( I cannot find my 70's reference)? and what is up with all the patents at the same time changes are happening in terms of availability?

The whole thing appears to be a profit generated model from where I sit... create a market and let it build to crescendo (fibrocystic breasts, Breast Cancer etc.), offer the treatment, cash in.

That said, that the information has been brought into the "public" forefront (I was doing iodine and eating seaweed back in the 70's; Cayce protocol) by these doctors is a good thing, but it will not come without a price. Tweet