CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE VS. HOLISTIC: A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE

January 10, 2004

JoAnn Guest

Jan 10, 2004 09:43 PST

CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE VS. HOLISTIC:

A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE

- Tim O'Shea

" when you believe in things that you don't understand,

then you're suffering Superstition ain't the way. "

- S. Wonder

" This is the world that has been pulled over your eyes

to blind you to the truth. "

-------- Morpheus

The Matrix

IN THIS CHAPTER:

- Definitions of allopathic and holistic

- The Germ Theory

- The military model of health

- Food vs. drugs

- Side effects

- Media control

- The American Madness Association

- Scientific studies rarely involve science

- Tons of cash - their trough runneth over

- 4th leading cause of death in the U.S.

- Raw statistics on diseases

- The Illusion of Medical Freedom

- Animal Sacrifice

A NORMAL LIFE

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

human urine

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:

Viagra + 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 moron 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.

UNSCIENTIFIC? GET SOME NEW MATERIAL!

Allopathic medicine has always criticized holistic medicine with the

same complaint down through the years, persisting intact to the

present

time: the same thing over and over - alternative medicine is

unscientific, unproven, not supported by controlled clinical trials,

undocumented in peer-reviewed journals, and anecdotal. They don't

really say Alternative doesn't work; just that it's unproven. What

this

implies of course is that mainstream allopathy is objectively

scientific and proven by clinical research.

There are two big problems with such claims:

1. it's apples and oranges

2. " science " is really not that scientific

Apples and oranges. Two different things, totally different

paradigms.

Alternative medicine is not just a different way to cure the

diseases

we might get. It is not competing with anyone in the Disease Care

market. Holistic medicine doesn't cure diseases. It promotes a

healthy

condition which is not conducive to disease, by purifying the

biological terrain, to allow the body to express its natural

potential.

All the time.

Healthy people don't get sick. No colds, no headaches, no arthritis,

no

diabetes, no heart disease, no cancer they don't get sick. Holistic

medicine doesn't wait around for some disease or other to show up.

Holistic medicine is something you do every day whether you feel

good

or bad. It's not a cure - it's a lifestyle. Improved quality of life.

Dean Black talks about empirical data being just as valid as

controlled

studies. Empirical means that what is commonly apparent and

successful

over a number of years does not need to be " proven. "

Here's an example: For centuries, horse owners have customarily put

goldfish in their horses' watering troughs in order to keep algae

from

forming. Now, no one may have ever conducted formal studies to prove

it

works, but anyone with a brain in his head knows empirically that

the

water stays cleaner and has to be changed less often if goldfish are

kept in the troughs.

Much of allopathy is also empirical. Aspirin, for example. Probably

the

most common drug in the world, but it has never been proven in

scientific trials. Controlled tests for aspirin's effectiveness have

never been done. But it's a drug, with very consistent results:

20,000

tons of aspirin are consumed every year. (Limits to Medicine)

For that matter, surgery itself has never been subjected to clinical

trials! It's just a tradition – empirical. And with modern elective,

exploratory surgeries and the latest 'prophylactic' surgeries (not

the

Trojan kind; the just-in-case kind), the mood seems now to be

frivolous, cavalier about whacking off this or that body part.

In a different way, the strength of holistic methods often lies in

their empirically demonstrable value. Chiropractic, for one, has

been

around for over 100 years, with millions of people being cared for.

The

benefits of spinal correction are easily shown and easily

understood.

Chiropractic doesn't have to be " proven " except to a defense lawyer

or

someone with a political agenda to attack it. Same way with

acupuncture. The 12 meridians and the thousands of herbs employed by

acupuncturists - none of this has been " proven " by

strict " scientific "

studies. After 4000 years, acupuncture is still around, and people

still choose it as a helpful treatment. Also for the minute

dilutions

employed by homeopathic medicine - these have never been written up

in

NEJM after double blind studies showed their effectiveness.

Allopathic posturing pretends that all drugs and procedures have

been

thoroughly tested in objective scientific research studies, which

guarantees both safety and effectiveness. There are some basic

problems

with such a wish.

First of all, in the " controlled " study, scientists pretend they are

testing some drug by isolating just one single variable, and holding

all other factors the same, in order to prove the effectiveness of

the

drug. The only way to do this is to place the subjects in a position

of

uncertainty and helplessness: the " double-blind " study. That means

that

supposedly neither the researchers nor the subjects know who's

getting

the drug and who's getting the placebo sugar pill. The point is, the

whole structure of such a design is flawed. Why? Because we're

dealing

with the innate healing systems of the human body. It doesn't

respond

normally in a situation of helplessness and uncertainty. That's not

its

normal condition. That's not how people live their lives. So the

outcomes of such artificial situations as the sacred double blind

study

are going to be essentially meaningless when applied to the normal

everyday physiology of a healthy human.

Rene' Dubos saw through this mirage back in 1957:

" Ideally, the experimenter works in a closed system, affected only

by

the determinants that he has introduced, under the conditions he has

selected. Naturally, however, events never occur in a closed system.

They are determined and modified by circumstances and forces that

cannot be foreseen, let alone controlled. "

- The Mirage of Health

That's the first problem.

Then there's the problem of the politics of reporting data. Fraud in

reporting of data used in medical journal articles is rampant. John

Braithwaite, MD, a UN researcher and the author of a study entitled

" Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical Industry " has meticulously

documented the indigenous type of phony data associated

with " studies "

in many countries, even those that are reported in the " peer-

reviewed "

journals:

" Data fabrication is so widespread, that it is called 'making' in

the

Japanese pharmaceutical industry, and 'graphiting' or 'dry labeling'

in

the United States Pharmaceutical companies face great temptations to

mislead health authorities about the safety of their products

..Inquiries into scientific fraud in the US have shown that there is

a

substantial problem of safety testing of drugs in the US, just as

has

been documented in Japan. "

You don't even have to think about it to realize why. A drug company

may spend $100 million and five years doing testing to try and get a

drug approved by the FDA. Since they are paying for the " research "

themselves, guess what happens to data that is coming out

unfavorable

to their expectations? Often the study is cancelled. With the

researchers trying to get funding for the next phase of research -

are

they going to be rewarded for positive or negative data about the

drug

being studied? Which one?

CLINICAL EXPERIENCE IS ANECDOTAL

Anecdotal is another favorite word used to slam holistic medicine.

Allopaths say that holistic methods are unscientific because results

are simply anecdotal, meaning case by case. The real meaning of

anecdotal, however, is case history. In actuality, in the practice

of

medicine nothing is more important than the case history. That's how

people's lives really are affected by illness and by health; case

history is what really happens to people, real people - the patients

who really walk in the door. The point here is that actual case

histories cannot be controlled by studies bought and paid for by

those

whose interests are best served by a certain outcome. " Scientific "

studies and reporting can be controlled by political and economic

consideration - unwanted research topics never get funding; unwanted

data often is ignored or not reported. By contrast, patients who

actually walk in the door are not subjects in a research project.

Hundreds of case histories, anecdotal individual cases, year after

year

accumulate to give a doctor the most valuable source of information

possible: clinical observation. The years of experience and clinical

observation - these are not to be trivialized as something

intrinsically inferior to the " real science " that gets published in

medical journals.

Mainstream medicine may use this " anecdotal " ploy not only against

holistic ideas, but also against any medical ideas or research that

is

beginning to stray outside the fold of Pharmaceutical Economics. New

ideas are not welcome until the Angle has been figured out. For now,

just remember this - the word " anecdotal " is a red flag that means

" probable snowjob ahead. "

SCIENTIFIC?

At least 100,000 deaths a year from prescription drugs that were

correctly prescribed and administered - wait a minute. All these

drugs

are tested by randomized, double blind controlled clinical trials,

right? So they're all " scientifically proven " to work, right?

Employing

the most rigorous of scientific testing procedures, only the drugs

that

have made it through all that are allowed to be put on the market,

right? So what's all this posturing about, that alternative medicine

isn't reproducible in clinical trials, LIKE REAL MEDICINE IS. Here

we

have the finished products of their own scientific processes, so I

want

to know, why are 160 of them taken off the market every year only to

be

replaced by about the same number? And why are they killing all

these

people? Many are starting to notice this!

Here's a recent example. The FDA recently approved a new vaccine for

Lyme Disease. (M2 Presswire 12/23/98) Only problem is, they're

admitting it's only 50% effective. Now think about that! This is a

new

drug that has successfully passed through the whole ritual of tests

and

approval, and now doctors are allowed to prescribe it and sell it.

At

50% efficacy! What about the other 50%? But this vaccine is now

" scientifically " tested! No wonder side effects of correctly

prescribed

prescription drugs is now the FOURTH leading cause of death.

Here's another example of science. Ciba-Geigy, the Swiss drug giant

who

brought Ritalin to the world, was ordered by a Tokyo court to pay

$17

million in damages when it was proven that their drug Oxychinol had

caused at least 100 deaths and 30,000 cases of blindness or

paralysis.

(Ruesch, p 18) What was the drug for? Indigestion when travelling!

The

drug was sold under 168 different names in Japan alone. After they

were

fined, Ciba-Geigy continued to market the drug all over the world!

(Geneva Press Conference on SMON)

It comes down to this: if allopathic medicine is so scientific and

meticulously proven, why does it have such a deplorable showing when

it

comes to effectiveness? How are we doing with disease? Are we

getting

healthier or sicker year by year? If it's working so well why are

people spending now $30 billion dollars out of their own pockets for

alternatives (JAMA, Apr 98) many of which are really shaky.

Especially now, with the Internet in operation, it is getting much

harder to cover up the inability of allopathic medicine to deliver

the

goods:

- Continual increase in degenerative diseases

1 in 12 babies born in America with birth defects (Lesso, p5)

U.S is #22 in infant mortality compared with other nations

(UNICEF)

largest health budget in history - $1.2 trillion

Increased numbers of deaths from cancer and heart disease

every year (Vital Statistics 1950-1994)

Access to non-mainstream uncontrolled media sources like the

Internet

Increase in iatrogenic disease and deaths (caused by hospitals)

(Jonas, p 1616)

Increase in deaths and complications from standard childhood

vaccinations

(Sanctity of Human Blood)

THEIR TROUGH RUNNETH OVER

Now I don't want to belabor the idea, but it's fundamental in any

discussion of modern American health care not to get too warm and

fuzzy

about philosophical issues without acknowledging what really

determines

the direction of mainstream medical policy: profit. The Coin, not

the

Quonh. Today's HMOs are no longer run by doctors; they're run by

corporate execs. As you try to understand how things could have

gotten

this out of hand, try and keep the following in mind:

- between 1959 and 1979 the consumer price index rose by 74%. In

that

same period, the cost of medical care went up by 330%

- Limits to Medicine, p.2

- in 1939, the medical budget was $3.5 billion (Carrel, p 80)

- In 1985,the medical budget was at $360 billion per year

(Alan Levin)

- In 1991, the medical budget was at $750 billion per year

(Alan Levin)

- In 1999, the medical budget was over $1.2 trillion per year

Ideas that get in the way of this Machine get opposed by any and

every

means.

WHAT DO AMERICANS DIE FROM?

Every year 2.3 million Americans cash in their chips, buy the ranch,

go

to meet Elvis... (Vital Statistics, 1999) Here's why:

TOP 10 CAUSES OF DEATH IN THE U.S.

1. heart disease---- 720,000

2. cancer---------- 539,000

3. stroke---------- 159,000

4 pulmonary disease--- 109,000

5. accidents------- 95,000

6. pneumonia/influenza-- 84,000

7. diabetes-------- 62,000

8. suicide--------- 30,000

9. kidney disease----- 25,000

10. liver disease------ 25,000

Adding up these top ten causes comes to about 1.8 million. According

to

Vital Statistics, the standard publication of the National Health

Service and the Centers for Disease Control, the other half million

deaths come from miscellaneous causes like homicide, AIDS,

snakebites,

and less common diseases.

But watch how statistics are twisted. From the following sources, we

now know that at least 400,000 deaths are caused by prescription

drugs

and medical error.

" 150,000 to 300,000 Americans are injured or killed each year

because

of medical negligence (i.e., mistreated diseases, surgeries, drug

reactions, misprescribed drugs.) "

--Wall Street Journal, Jan. 13, 1993.

Right up there with deaths from medications come deaths from medical

error. Besides the 100,000 people dying from drugs every year an

additional 180,000 patients die each year from medical mistakes,

being

injured while in the hospital, and another 1 million are injured.

This

is from Journal of the American Medical Association, July 5, 1995,

274:29-34.

A more recent source is the startling admission of David Lawrence,

MD,

the Chief Executive of the nation's largest HMO – Kaiser Permanente.

In

the 15 July 1999 issue of the Oakland Tribune, Dr. Lawrence states

that

medical mistakes now kill some 400,000 Americans every year, more

than

all the deaths from alcohol, firearms and tobacco combined.

(Rosenblatt)

Different sources different figures - Ralph Nader, JAMA Apr 98,

JAMA,

July 5, 1995, Wall St. Journal, Oakland Tribune Jul 99. But all

agree

on one idea: more Americans are dying of prescription drugs every

year

than died in the entire Vietnam War (55,000) and the Battle of

Gettysburg (50,000) put together. Probably way more. Where is the

objection? Where is the outcry?

Anybody clocking this? The most conservative medical estimates put

the

total deaths per year from prescription drugs and hospital errors

together at 300,000 per year. It's probably 10 times more, as the

editor of the Apr 98 JAMA stated in his editorial on p 1216. If the

number of deaths from these two causes combined is only twice as

many

as these lowest conservative figures, that puts medical error and

drug

side effect deaths as the Number One cause of death in the U.S.

today,

which is more than likely.

Now going back to the top ten causes of death above, see the

overlap?

Medical error is not even listed by Vital Statistics as a cause of

death. How many of these medical mistakes and drug effects caused

the

heart attacks or strokes, which are listed? Nobody knows – they

don't

track it. But again, it's very possible that medical error and

prescription drugs are the number one cause of death in the U.S.

today,

especially considering the estimate of the JAMA editor that only 10%

get reported.

No wonder your grandfather doesn't want to go to the hospital.

That's

called the Survival Instinct.

A DOUBLE STANDARD

Allopaths want holistic cures to be subject to the same " rigors " of

scientific testing as " real drugs " must go through.

Allopaths hope to give the impression that mainstream pharmacology

and

standard hospital procedures are " backed by scientific research " and

are therefore not only safe, but superior to any procedures of

Alternative Medicine. In this way, with the help of the legislature

and

the twin Doberman FDA and FTC, natural cures will be forced out of

the

market. $5.8 billion every year is spent reinforcing the inaccurate

notion of the " scientific validity " of mainstream medicine into the

public awareness: in commercials, medical publications and general

media. (CLA, Jan 99)

Scientific? Fully 80% of surgical procedures have never been tested

for

safety or efficacy in clinical trials. As for The Machines

glittering

all throughout the hospital, there are no standards of efficacy for

an

instrument to be introduced into practice, except incorporation into

the insurance billing codes. No machine ever has to be proven to be

of

any value whatsoever. The patient's long-term welfare is not an

issue.

In addition, it is an

" amazing fact that physicians are not required to be certified by

any

independent professional organization to show they know the proper

use

of the medical devices they operate "

- Medicine on Trial p 47

Did I mention that drugs are now the leading cause of death in the

U.S.?

Science stopped being scientific when the legislature started being

controlled by the drug and oil lobbies. And that was a while ago.

Why

then does the public instinctively regard alternative methods as

less

scientific than drugs and surgery, even though paradoxically,

holistic

methods are being chosen more and more?

It's a one-word answer:

CONDITIONING

First of all, commercials. Drug advertising is the largest single

source of revenue to TV, most medical journals, and many nonmedical

publications. How long can you watch TV without seeing a drug ad?

Five

minutes? Ten? Whose commercials do you see at the breaks in the

" expose¢s " on some natural health technique? Three guesses. Only

logical - the drug advertisers are TV's bread and butter. Do you

think

the drug companies want to see shows that illustrate the value of

some

holistic natural cure?

Second, medical publications. This is becoming a really

embarrassing.

The two most respected medical journals in the U.S. are Journal of

the

American Medical Association and the New England Journal of

Medicine.

Get any issue of either of these and start leafing through it. You

will

notice that the full color drug ads literally crowd out the

articles.

So what point of view do you think is going to be supported in the

few

articles that actually get printed in between all these centerfolds?

It's not uncommon even to see full-page ads for MacDonald's in these

top two medical journals! Talking about nutrition! Peer-reviewed?

What

good is that when all the " peers " are fighting for crumbs off the

same

plate?

The third area we see the Drug Cartel's advertising millions is in

the

popular press: newspapers, magazines, books. Anyone who thinks a

newspaper exists to report the news has not been paying attention.

All

this First Amendment stuff is phony posturing - the printed media is

the only business that tries to pretend that it's not a business.

Newspapers exist to make money. They make money by selling

newspapers,

by advertising, and by presenting favorable images for those in

power.

Ever notice how at least once a week, there is a feature story about

the latest " breakthrough " drug or procedure? It may be real general,

or

might even be a teaser, like it's 'coming soon,' often with very

tentative or shaky research. But these articles, even though they

look

like reporting, are not reporting. They are advertising, and are

paid

for. Dictated by the press releases of the AMA. Check out the

credentials of the " Health Science " editor. His last assignment was

probably movie reviews.

More than a century ago, Leo Tolstoy put it like this:

" All newspaper and journalistic activity is an intellectual

brothel from which there is no retreat. "

- Letter to Prince V. 1871

No different in Time, Newsweek, The New Yorker, or any of the giant

glossy magazine conglomerates like Conde' Nast - look at the big

ads.

These ads are an indicator of the point of view you'll see

represented

in the " objective " reporting in the articles. It's all there, just

below the surface.

In the past couple of years, a bold step was taken in magazine

advertising: marketing new drugs directly to the consumer, so

they'll

know which drugs to ask the doctor for. Ads that formerly only

appeared

in medical journals are now popping up in magazines found at any

newsstand. (Life, June 1999, pp 13, 60, 117) Take a step back from

this

brazen commercialism and see what the industry is actually doing.

They're cutting out the middleman. Now we have lay people with no

medical training or credentials whatsoever who think they are

informed

enough to self-prescribe a drug just because they saw a two-page ad

in

Life or Newsweek. What about case history, side effects, drug

interactions, or the opinion of an experienced physician in deciding

the appropriateness of a medication for a given patient? What's

wrong

with this picture? Any doubts about who's really running the show?

WHITE PUNKS ON DOPE

With some 12,000 drugs remaining on the market at any one time

(Gorman), almost 100 new drugs are approved every two years. (FDA

Medical Officer's Report, 1998) Let's see - why would that be? Why

after all those millions and all those years of scientific testing

would a company not be absolutely certain that a drug would be safe

and

effective? Why? Why are there always new drugs? They're not getting

better and better every year; our health is not improving because of

the increased quality of our drugs. Here's why: the real testing is

done on human patients, after the drug hits the market. When enough

people die or get major side effects, as with DES, chloramphenicol,

thalidomide, fen-phen, Seldane, rotavirus vaccine, and dozens of

others, AND a drug gets bad press, only then will the FDA pull it

off

the market. Even then the drug often continues to be sold in Europe,

Asia, or South America!

Take a guess how many drugs are found to have major side effects

after

they are placed on the market:

" Overall, 51 percent of approved drugs have serious adverse

effects which are not detected prior to approval. "

- JAMA 1998; 279:1571-1573

Who are the lab rats here? Is this the high standard to which

allopaths

would hold holistic cures? The point is, they demand that the

scientific proof they pretend to have for pharmaceuticals should be

required for alternative therapies as well, but without all the

false

reporting and manipulation of data. Standards, anyone? Make mine a

Double.

HERE'S HOW WE'RE REALLY DOING:

The following tables document the increase in several leading killer

diseases, and tell the story about infant mortality as well:

Cancer continues on the rise. From the cancer chapter,( CANCER

you'll

remember this chart:

Mortality from Cancer in the U.S.

year --- deaths/ 100,000

1967--- 157.2

1970 --- 162.9

1982 --- 187.3

1987 --- 198.2

1988 --- 198.4

1989 --- 201.0

1990 --- 203.2

1991 --- 204.1

1992 --- 204.1

source: Vital Statistics of the United States vol.II 1967-1992

In 1994, mortality went to 220 per 100,000. (CA Journal for Cancer

Clinicians Jan 97)

Seen these figures in Newsweek lately? How about the Chronicle?

Heart disease, of course, is the #1 killer of Americans. The most

common kind is called chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or

COPD.

Look at these death rates:

COPD

YEAR--- DEATHS per 100,000

1970 --- 15

1980 --- 24

1900 --- 34

1993 --- 39

1994 --- 39

source: Statistical Abstracts of the U.S. p. 94

Let's see how we're doing with diabetes, the seventh leading cause

of

death in the U.S.

DIABETES

YEAR--- DEATHS PER 100,000

1900 --- 11

1940 --- 26

1970 --- 18

1992 --- 19.8

1994 --- 21.2

SOURCE: Historical Abstracts of the U.S. p58

How about asthma incidence? Are all those kids walking around with

inhalators getting better?

Here is a graph from the National Health Interview Survey, ADR 277

NIH.

Top line shows asthma prevalence. Bottom line shows office visits

for

asthma. [see p50]

Think asthma has declined since 1994? Check out the headline story

on

the front page of the San Jose Mercury on 4 Sep 99: " Asthma at

Epidemic

Levels. " This article quotes CDC figures stating that asthma

incidence

has risen from 6.7 million cases in 1980 to 17.3 million cases in

1999.

Every year, 5000 of these cases are fatal, despite over $14 billion

per

year currently spent on treatment. (Borenstein)

Septicemia, or blood infection, is also moving up the ladder:

SEPTICEMIA

YEAR--- DEATHS per 100,000

1970 --- 1.7

1980 --- 4.2

1990 --- 7.7

1993 --- 8.0

source: Statistical Abstracts of the U.S. p.94

I don't think Semmelweis, Pasteur, or Alexander Fleming would be too

impressed by these modern figures of Americans dying from blood

infections every year in the 1990s.

Our babies aren't doing that great either:

INFANT MORTALITY RATES AND RANKS:

[ See p.52]

Slovenia? We're behind them? And Italy? Half of Italy is Third

World.

And Greece spends one tenth of our medical budget PER CAPITA!

Now we could go on and on with this, but I think you may be getting

the

idea. People are getting tired of watching their grandparents die,

and

then a generation later, watching their parents die of the same

diseases. It's only fancy dancing and playing with statistics that

is

vainly trying to keep up the illusion that everything's fine. You

can

spin it any way you want, but one immutable fact is just sitting

there

like the elephant in the living room: we don't have health care in

this

country; we have Disease Care, and it's NOT WORKING.

The above charts are the unadorned figures, kept well hidden by

confusing analyses of dozens of other factors. Age, race, sex, and

geographic area data can easily obscure the bottom line: that as a

nation we're getting sicker, not healthier.

" The true miracle of modern medicine is diabolical. It consists in

making not only individuals but whole populations survive on

inhumanly

low levels of personal health. "

- Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis

Medical researcher John Lesso also is less than taken by the

effectiveness of the mainstream approach:

" Allopathic medicine, also known as 'modern medicine,' has

unfortunately been largely ineffective in dealing with most

diseases,

and more than often it introduces further problems. Ironically, most

of

our present-day afflictions are the direct result of inappropriate

lifestyle and environment, and therefore can usually be prevented. "

- " Health In Crisis, " intro

People are beginning to spend several billion dollars per year out

of

their own pockets for simple, natural healing methods not covered by

their " health plans. " Each year, it's more. The dwarfing of natural

medicine by mainstream medicine is becoming less apparent year by

year

as the failures of drugs and surgery become more difficult to hide.

A

study that appeared in JAMA, Nov 1998, showed that the American

people

now make 629 million visits to alternative practitioners every year,

compared with 386 million visits to their primary doctors!

(Eisenman)

The entire budget for alternative care is between $21 and $32

billion.

And 46% of the population are going to alternative medicine

practitioners these days. A fundamental shift has started.

Doesn't really sound like " alternative " is quite the right word any

more, does it?

ALLOPATHIC SUPERIORITY

In fairness, the allopathic approach does have its areas of

supremacy

and brilliance, however. If I am in a motorcycle accident on the

freeway and get opened up or broken up, don't take me to a holistic

healer. Allopathic mainstream medicine has evolved the most advanced

emergency trauma procedures in history. For truly life-threatening

situations, as long as they don't get carried away when they see

four-star coverage, the mainstream approach should be chosen.

Other areas of advanced and valuable technology include eye surgery,

wart removal, teflon joint replacements, and arthroscopic

procedures,

after holistic supports and nutritional approaches have failed.

CHRONICS

Almost 80% of medical treatment in this country however is for

chronic

conditions: in 1995, the number or people with 1 or more chronic

illnesses was estimated to be almost 100 million. (JAMA, November

13,

1996) The authors of this study concluded that medical treatments

are

often not effective for chronic conditions, which is obvious when

looking at the above statistical charts. So we're talking about $800

billion out of the $1.2 trillion medical budget that isn't really

doing

its job. Some re-vamping may be in order. That was your money!

Q & A

With just a faint glimmer of doubt cast upon any given medical

situation and diagnosis, perhaps now the reader will be motivated to

get a second opinion, not a second medical opinion, but a second

health

opinion, a holistic one - an opinion based not on what is good for

the

doctor or the hospital or the insurance company, but what is best

for

the patient's long term health. Apply the following simple

principles

to any medical decision that must be made:

....

THE ILLUSION OF MEDICAL FREEDOM

Medical freedom is the idea that the individual should have a choice

of

any therapeutic system he feels will restore health. Unfortunately

this

freedom was left out of the Constitution. The father of American

psychiatry, Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of

Independence,

had wanted to include it, realizing the problems its omission might

spawn. Rush said that if medical freedom were not guaranteed and

specified, it was likely that one group of doctors would monopolize

health care by passing legislation to outlaw their competition -

other

types of health care.

He sure called that one.

Dr. Schulze points out:

" Over the past 80 years, organized medical groups and pharmaceutical

companies, using lawyers, bribes, lobbies, insurance companies, and

the

strong arm of the FDA, have been very busy. They have corrupted

elected

officials to pass laws to remove any competition. They have crushed

Natural Doctors, Natural Medicine, and Self-Care. Their goal is to

monopolize health care and make us dependent on medical doctors and

drugs. They have made many healing herbs, foods, and even nutrients

illegal Organized medicine has outlawed words for other health

professionals to use, such as Diagnose and Cure. Just by using these

words you can be arrested for " Practicing Medicine Without a

License. "

Examples are endless. Under the guise of " protecting the public "

laws

are passed and the twin Dobermans of the AMA - the FDA and the FTC -

may be commanded to attack any natural healing method that doesn't

promote drugs and surgery. To cite just a few:

- The 150-year war against homeopathy, the AMA's first rival, whose

destruction was targeted in the AMA's founding charter.

- The 11-year antitrust suit against the AMA won by chiropractors in

1989 proved a short-lived victory. Since then, DCs have been

systematically pushed out of a large portion of insurance coverage

in

the country. (Lisa)

• The FTC's recent attack on a definition of chiropractic that has

been

in effect for over 100 years

- The recent attack by the FDA on holistic nutrition companies which

claim specific health benefits

- Systematic persecution of doctors who have had extensive clinical

success treating cancer with natural, non-drug medicines: Burzynski,

Donsbach, Kelley, Anderson, Schulze, Hoxsey, Naessens (Options)

PRACTICING SANITY WITHOUT A LICENSE

To question a system of disease care that is too market-driven to be

interested in health - that's a sane course. Step back from the

whole

picture a moment and look what has happened here: the triumvirate of

Disease Care that rules America today - the AMA, the FDA, and FTC -

have been empowered by the legislature to make it a capital crime to

" practice medicine without a license " or to claim to cure disease

without a medical license. OK. So tell me, where did they derive

that

power from? Who gave them the right to determine what constitutes

" medicine " and what doesn't? Where were we when we gave them

permission

to determine what branches of the healing arts should be available

to

us any time we wish? How is science able to be legislated? How can

any

real scientific progress take place?

The illusion the allopaths have sold the people is that such

legislation is " for the protection " of the people, to protect them

from

fraud, and that people might be distracted by wacky unscientific

quacks

who will deter them from getting the real " scientific " medicine they

need. But which is the more sacred trust - medical freedom of choice

or

protecting the people from fraud? The people can protect themselves

from fraud. In fact that's exactly what medical freedom is: to have

the

right to decide for oneself what is fraud and what is useful.

Otherwise

it's the Fox guarding the Chicken Coop.

For true medical freedom to exist, a wide range of health options

must

be available at all times, even wacky ones. The effective ones will

survive. The choice should not be subject to legislation for the

obvious reason that politics and big money control the legislators.

That's what we've seen all through history - people dying by being

forced to take medications that were deemed the most scientific at

the

time, which coincidentally meant the ones researched and paid for

the

powers who controlled both the medical research facilities AND the

legislature that enforces the findings of that research.

In America today, there is only the most grudging type of medical

freedom in effect. Peripheral alternative therapies are allowed to

flit

around the perimeter, subject to being targeted and attacked any

time

the Triumvirate gets a notion to make an example of somebody.

Control

of the media, " science, " and the court system can put a stop to

practically any holistic practitioner or company, as evidenced in

Walters' book of vanished, suppressed technologies (Options).

Illegal for anyone but an MD to claim to cure disease? Who are the

quacks? Look at allopathic cure rates for degenerative disease,

cited

above, in the past 75 years. Their primary " cure " - prescription

drugs

- is now the fourth leading cause of death, by their own statistics!

Who's making false medical claims here? Are they pretending nobody

notices this? Ever notice the only types of " fraud " charges ever

levied

by the Triumvirate are against natural non-drug non-surgical cures?

The

true fraud runs rampant.

But today with the online flow of information as yet ungoverned in

this

country, allopathy is looking around for something to change into.

And

it's coming soon to your town: Alternative Lite. Refer to that

chapter.

BOTTOM LINE?

Just remember this: holistic medicine says the body can usually heal

itself. Allopathic medicine says it can't, and requires powerful

interventions. Allopathic is constantly posturing that

it " understands "

the body well enough to chemically take control " for its own good. "

Unfortunately our disease statistics prove otherwise.

....

QUICK CURE VS. LIFESTYLE CHANGE

The illusion of allopathy is that diseases are just drug

deficiencies:

menopause is an estrogen deficiency, headache is an aspirin

deficiency,

diabetes is a fake insulin deficiency, thyroid disease is a fake

thyroid hormone deficiency, depression is a Zoloft deficiency We'll

diagnose your disease and give you the drug that cures it. Many

people

want an immediate cure, and they'd rather not participate in the

process if at all possible, thank you. What they really want is

something to stop the annoying symptoms - the cough, the joint pain,

the fatigue, the bloating, the cancer - that at the same time will

allow them to continue their present course of self-abuse.

Allopathic medicine has no problem with such a mindset.

Allopathic medicine is more than happy to reinforce the notion of

Don't

Worry About It, We'll Take Care of Everything. Allopathy wants

people

to abdicate responsibility for their own health. More compliant drug

customers. How many times have you heard your doctor tell one of

your

family not to worry about a serious side effect of some drug or

procedure, with the reasoning that our " cure rates " for that side

effect are " very good. " Go ahead and eat whatever you want; diet has

nothing to do with this disease Uninformed people buy this sales

pitch

every day.

The holistic cure is slower, less dramatic, and unfortunately

requires

some effort on the part of the patient. Since the holistic cure

doesn't

chase symptoms, it's really not over when the patient " feels

better. "

Since the holistic cure is from the inside out - from the nervous

system and the blood on out - symptoms come and go day by day as the

body retraces its steps back to health. Some days the patient feels

fine, other days he may feel like hell - doesn't really matter if

it's

part of the healing process. The difference is that it's a lifestyle

change. A mental paradigm shift opens up the world of a hundred

possible daily boosts to overall health, always asking - how can I

support the immune system, how can I reduce fatigue, how can I

maximize

nerve flow, how can I build up my nutrient reserves, how can I

improve

detoxification, how can I improve stamina... Everything the patient

puts in his mouth, everything he does is a health decision that

takes

these questions into consideration. Finally the patient can say -

OK,

I've got it from here, and takes back the wheel of the Bus. Until

that

line is crossed, the patient will always be playing catch-up, by

pretending to think that someone else can know his own body better

than

he does.

Many people are getting tired of seeing their parents die from the

same

diseases their grandparents died from.

They're turning in desperation to safer, more sensible, less

insurance-driven methods, such as homeopathy, perfect diet,

acupuncture, massage, chiropractic, chelation, colonic therapy,

whole

food supplements, exercise, stress reduction, and blood

detoxification.

Many medical doctors are incorporating holistic methods into their

practices, as they see the obvious failures of too many drugs.. The

focus is on wellness, continually improving health. In Chapter 5,

Alternative Lite, you will see how some medical doctors and the drug

companies are trying to pretend like Alternative Medicine was their

idea all along, instead of jumping off the pharmaceutical Titanic,

like

they're doing now.

LEt's GET REAL

It's amusing when super-optimistic holistic people think that

General

Enlightenment is coming, that soon everyone is going to be taking

enzymes and antioxidants instead of Prozac and Synthroid, and that

those evil allopaths are going to see the error of their ways and

suddenly realize that health can only come from inside, not outside

the

body: wow, sorry, you guys were right all along! How obtuse of us!

Here, you chiropractors and homeopaths, take charge of our

hospitals!

And then will follow the great transformation to gentle, natural

methods, supplements, and procedures, replacing the $1.2 trillion

drugs-and-surgery show. And our health will skyrocket!

The truth is, allopaths will never get it. They can't get it. Why

not?

Simple: different objectives. The objective of allopathy is not,

never

has been, and cannot be the promotion of health as a normal

condition.

Allopathy cannot accept the idea that the universal intelligence

inside

the body, which evolved our species from the ocean, and developed

every

body system over countless millennia, that this intelligence is

wiser

and more powerful than manmade chemicals. Chemicals which are

marketed

by the merchants who control both law and medicine.

Allopathy needs the merchants, and the merchants need allopathy.

For a reality check, take a walk around your local hospital. Look at

all that concrete, all that glass, all those floors, all the cars in

the parking lot. Think how many hospitals are in your town. How many

are in your state, in the U.S.? This is a system that has to be fed,

that will defend itself. The financiers who run the whole allopathic

setup are not predicting its demise any time soon, just because a

few

people are realizing it doesn't work. They've had bigger problems

than

that before. The $1.2 trillion budget of 2000 is projected to be $2

trillion by the year 2010. The 3 billion Rx's written this year will

climb to 4 billion by 2004. (USA Today, 3 May 00)

....

Here's what's really going to happen, actually it's already

happening:

organized medicine must respond to the exploding popularity of

Alternative therapies. They've already started, and the message is

loud

and clear: natural methods do work, we've always known that, and we

have the best natural medicines, which won't interfere with your

heart

medication, your estrogen, your allergy shots, or your

antidepressants.

Feel good naturally, and safely! And consult your doctor.

Wow, I should write commercials! Point is, the push to subsume

Alternative Medicine is already in full operation. Organized

medicine

will use the huge information machine at its disposal in order to

confuse, dilute, and obscure the basic principles of natural healing

methods, with the goal of trying to engulf Alternative Medicine into

its own sphere. I have tried to put some perspective on this

phenomenon

in the chapter entitled Alternative Lite (HOME )

This is not to say that the holistic movement isn't growing. Of

course

it is. Chiropractic, the third largest health care service, behind

dentistry, now cares for about 10% of the population, and shows

consistent improvement in quality of life. Herb sales alone account

for

$4 billion. Acupuncture is being incorporated into many major

medical

plans. The real Alternative Medicine will do what it has always

done:

convert people to a more holistic lifestyle, one by one, by sheer

attrition. Brick by brick.

Something founded on universal healing principles appeals to people

on

a level outside and above the influence exerted by loud, expensive,

blatant advertising. People sense the truth of the holistic way:

nurture the body, encourage it, support its own wisdom, remove

interference and toxicity, and it will heal. Considering the

comparative size and strength of the two opposing forces, expanded

awareness will continue to be a slow, uphill progression, whose

trajectory will depend on the ability of holistic teachers to

demonstrate universal principles of healing, growth, and life.

Some 300 years ago, the German philosopher Wilhelm Leibniz predicted

all this. He said there would be a scientific revolution, a long

period

of scientific analysis and overspecialization in which " science "

would

be worshipped over all else. No universal thinking would be

considered.

Then finally, Leibniz said, the wheel would turn and there would be

an

awakening to a holistic view, and many of the " scientific "

approaches

would be abandoned as barbaric and obsolete.

This chapter celebrates that new awakening.

HOME

REFERENCES

[see p63]

Chopra, Deepak, MD Quantum Healing Bantam Books 1989.

Carrel, Alexis, MD Man, The Unknown Dell 1936.

Nightengale, F Letters From the Crimea Mandolin 1997.

Coleman, J The Committee of the 300 Holding 1992.

Shakespeare, W " Macbeth " IV, 1,10 1606.

Moss, Ralph PhD Questioning Chemotherapy Equinox 1996.

Moss, Ralph PhD The Cancer Industry

Leibniz, Wilhelm The Monadology

Tilden, JH MD Toxemia Explained Kessinger 1926.

Braithwaite, J MD " Corporate Crime in the Pharmaceutical Industry "

Routledge and Kegan Paul London 1984.

Bealle, Morris The Drug Story Hornet's Nest 1948

Chernow, Ronald Titan: The Life of John D Rockefeller Random House

1998.

Reitman, J " The muckraker vs. the millionaire "

Scholastic Update 2 Nov 98 v131 p14

Lazarou J, et al. " Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospi

talized patients " JAMA 15 Apr 98, p1200

Eisenberg, DM et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the

United

States. JAMA 1998;280:1569

Rosenblatt,. R HMO Chief:Patients are at risk

Oakland Tribune 15 Jul 99

Dubos, Rene The Mirage of Health Rutgers Univ Press,

New Jersey p 267 1957.

Alderson, M - International Mortality Statistics Facts on File,

Inc 1981 ISBN 0-87196-514-3

- 63 -

Dufty, W Sugar Blues Time Warner 1975.

O'Shea, T The Sanctity of Human Blood NewWest 1999.

Mendelsohn, J MD Dissent in Medicine - Nine Doctors Speak Out

1985 ISBN: 0809252651

Bates, D " Drugs and adverse reactions: how worried

should we be?

Editorial, JAMA 15 Apr 98, v279, p1216

Jonas, W MD Alternative Medicine : Learning From the Past

JAMA 11 Nov 1998 vol280:18, p 1616

CDC National Vital Statistics Report

Vol. 47, no.19, June 1999.

Inlander C et al. Medicine On Trial Pantheon Books 1988

Rubin, R---Warnings elude patients, doctors alike---USA Today, 3 May

00

Wolinsky, H and Brune, T--- The Serpent and the Staff --- NY,

Tarcher/Putnam 1994

Gorman, C " Deadly Drug Duos " Time 22 Jun 98 p 80

Wolfe, S MD FDA Medical Officers Report Lower Standards

Permit Dangerous Drug Approvals

Health Research Group Oct 1998

Izumi, H Geneva Press Conference on SMON

Organizing Committee, Tokyo, Japan 1980

Black, Dean PhD Health At the Crossroads Tapestry Press 1988.

Tolstoy, L. Letters vol 1 1871 Christian

UNICEF The State of the World's Children 1996

http://www.efn.org/~valdas/tables2.html

Lesso, John Health in Crisis Autumn 1994 Campaign

Against Fraudulent Medical Research Newsletter

Bates, D MD Incidence of Adverse Drug Events

JAMA, July 5, 1995,

Wiseman, Bruce Psychiatry: The Ultimate Betrayal Freedom 1995.

Rorty, J " The AMA and the Cigarette Business "

Fortune Mar 1938 p 152

Schulze, R " The Plight of Healing in America Today "

Borenstein, S Asthma At Epidemic Levels San Jose Mercury News 4 Sep

99

U.S. Dept of Commerce Historical Abstracts of the U.S.: Colonial

Times

to 1970 p58

Hoffman, C et al. " Persons with Chronic Conditions: Their Prevalence

and

Costs, " ; Vol 276, No. 18,p1473 JAMA, November 13, 1996.

Reusch, H Naked Empress Civis Publ. 1992

Statistical Abstracts of the U.S. 1994

Illich, Ivan Medical Nemesis Pantheon Books 1976

Illich, Ivan Limits to Medicine 1979

Wall Street Journal 16 Sep 98 p1 (soft drinks - $54 billion)

M2 Presswire 12/23/98 " FDA approves first Lyme Disease vaccine "

- 64 -

Moore, Thomas J JAMA. 1998; 279:1571-1573

Center for Health Policy Research at George Washington University

Medical

Center in Washington, D.C.

CA Journal for Cancer Clinicians Jan 97

Life Magazine Jun 1999, p13, 60, 117

Horowitz, L Emerging Viruses:Aids and Ebola Tetrahedron 1999.

---

--

Sign In

CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE VS. HOLISTIC: A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads