Information for Transformation
This self-help alternative medicine site offers extensive educational information on the topics of natural healing, holistic and biological dentistry, herbal medicine, cleansing and detoxification, heavy metal detox, diet, nutrition, weight loss, and the finest, tried and tested health equipment and products available for the natural management of health.
"The greater the doubt, the greater the awakening; the smaller the doubt, the smaller the awakening. No doubt, no awakening." --G. -C. Chang
"The important thing is not to stop questioning." --Albert Einstein
The U.S. has a catastrophically fragmented health care system that provides incentives for sick care instead of prevention. The system is in dire need of reform -- reform to save lives, to save families and to save money for both patients and the American health care system.
Stand with more than 450,000 doctors who support health care reform. Call Congress: (202) 224-3121.
The U.S. health care system is a giant money making scam that is designed to drain as much money as possible out of all of us before we die. In the United States today, the health care industry is completely dominated by government bureaucrats, health insurance companies and pharmaceutical corporations. The pharmaceutical corporations spend billions of dollars to convince all of us to become dependent on their legal drugs, the health insurance companies make billions of dollars by providing as little health care as possible, and they both spend millions of dollars to make sure that our politicians in Washington D.C. keep the gravy train rolling. Meanwhile, large numbers of doctors are going broke and patients are not getting the care that they need. At this point, our health care system is a complete and total disaster. Health care costs continue to go up rapidly, the level of care that we are receiving continues to go down, and every move that our politicians make just seems to make all of our health care problems even worse.
In America today, a single trip to the emergency room can easily cost you $100,000, and if you happen to get cancer you could end up with medical bills in excess of a million dollars. Even if you do have health insurance, there are usually limits on your coverage, and the truth is that just a single major illness is often enough to push most American families into bankruptcy. Approximately 60 percent of all personal bankruptcies in the United States are related to medical bills. At the same time, hospital administrators, pharmaceutical corporations and health insurance company executives are absolutely swimming in huge mountains of cash. In America today, many hospital executives make absolutely ridiculous amounts of money... It has been estimated that hospitals overcharge Americans by about 10 billion dollars every single year. Unfortunately, this gigantic money making scam has become so large that it threatens to collapse both the U.S. health care system and the entire U.S. economy.
Medical bills have become so ridiculously large that virtually nobody can afford them. One man in California that had been diagnosed with cancer ran up nearly a million dollars in hospital bills before he died... This year the American people will spend approximately 2.8 trillion dollars on health care, and it is being projected that Americans will spend 4.5 trillion dollars on health care in 2019. The United States spends more on health care than Japan, Germany, France, China, the U.K., Italy, Canada, Brazil, Spain and Australia combined. If the U.S. health care system was a country, it would be the 6th largest economy on the entire planet. Back in 1960, an average of $147 was spent per person on health care in the United States. By 2009, that number had skyrocketed to $8,086. Approximately 41 percent of all working age Americans either have medical bill problems or are currently paying off medical debt. All over America, people are reporting huge health insurance premium increases thanks to Obamacare.
During 2013, Americans will spend more than 280 billion dollars on prescription drugs. Nearly half of all Americans now use prescription drugs on a regular basis according to the CDC. The CDC also says that approximately one-third of all Americans use two or more pharmaceutical drugs on a regular basis, and more than ten percent of all Americans use five or more pharmaceutical drugs on a regular basis. In 2010, the average teen in the U.S. was taking 1.2 central nervous system drugs. According to the CDC, approximately three quarters of a million people a year are rushed to emergency rooms in the U.S. because of adverse reactions to pharmaceutical drugs. Prescription drugs kill some 200,000 Americans every year. Will that number go up, now that most clinical trials are conducted overseas—on sick Russians, homeless Poles, and slum-dwelling Chinese—in places where regulation is virtually nonexistent, the F.D.A. doesn’t reach, and “mistakes” can end up in pauper’s graves?
Once upon a time, the drugs Americans took to treat chronic diseases, clear up infections, improve their state of mind, and enhance their sexual vitality were tested primarily either in the United States (the vast majority of cases) or in Europe. No longer. As recently as 1990, according to the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, a mere 271 trials were being conducted in foreign countries of drugs intended for American use. By 2008, the number had risen to 6,485—an increase of more than 2,000 percent. A database being compiled by the National Institutes of Health has identified 58,788 such trials in 173 countries outside the United States since 2000.
In 2008 alone, according to the inspector general’s report, 80 percent of the applications submitted to the F.D.A. for new drugs contained data from foreign clinical trials. Increasingly, companies are doing 100 percent of their testing offshore. The inspector general found that the 20 largest U.S.-based pharmaceutical companies now conducted “one-third of their clinical trials exclusively at foreign sites.” All of this is taking place when more drugs than ever—some 2,900 different drugs for some 4,600 different conditions—are undergoing clinical testing and vying to come to market.
Many of today’s trials still take place in developed countries, such as Britain, Italy, and Japan. But thousands are taking place in countries with large concentrations of poor, often illiterate people, who in some cases sign consent forms with a thumbprint, or scratch an “X.”
From the point of view of the drug companies, it’s easy to see why moving clinical trials overseas is so appealing. For one thing, it’s cheaper to run trials in places where the local population survives on only a few dollars a day. It’s also easier to recruit patients, who often believe they are being treated for a disease rather than, as may be the case, just getting a placebo as part of an experiment. And it’s easier to find what the industry calls “drug-naïve” patients: people who are not being treated for any disease and are not currently taking any drugs, and indeed may never have taken any—the sort of people who will almost certainly yield better test results. For some subjects overseas, participation in a clinical trial may be their first significant exposure to a doctor. Regulations in many foreign countries are also less stringent, if there are any regulations at all. The risk of litigation is negligible, in some places nonexistent. Ethical concerns are a figure of speech. Finally, the F.D.A. does so little monitoring that the companies can pretty much do and say what they want.
One big factor in the shift of clinical trials to foreign countries is a loophole in F.D.A. regulations: if studies in the United States suggest that a drug has no benefit, trials from abroad can often be used in their stead to secure F.D.A. approval. There’s even a term for countries that have shown themselves to be especially amenable when drug companies need positive data fast: they’re called “rescue countries.”
To have an effective regulatory system you need a clear chain of command—you need to know who is responsible to whom, all the way up and down the line. There is no effective chain of command in modern American drug testing. Around the time that drugmakers began shifting clinical trials abroad, in the 1990s, they also began to contract out all phases of development and testing, putting them in the hands of for-profit companies. It used to be that clinical trials were done mostly by academic researchers in universities and teaching hospitals, a system that, however imperfect, generally entailed certain minimum standards. The free market has changed all that. Today it is mainly independent contractors who recruit potential patients both in the U.S. and—increasingly—overseas. They devise the rules for the clinical trials, conduct the trials themselves, prepare reports on the results, ghostwrite technical articles for medical journals, and create promotional campaigns. The people doing the work on the front lines are not independent scientists. They are wage-earning technicians who are paid to gather a certain number of human beings; sometimes sequester and feed them; administer certain chemical inputs; and collect samples of urine and blood at regular intervals. The work looks like agribusiness, not research.
What began as a mom-and-pop operation has grown into a vast army of formal “contract-research organizations” that generate annual revenue of $20 billion. They can be found conducting trials in every part of the world.
The F.D.A., the federal agency charged with oversight of the food and drugs that Americans consume, is rife with conflicts of interest. Doctors, who insist the drug you take is perfectly safe, may be collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars from the company selling the drug. Reasearch in pharmaceutical-company payments to physicians, has identified 17,000 doctors who have collected speaking and consulting fees, including nearly 400 who have received $100,000 or more since 2009.
Quite often, the F.D.A. never bothers to check for interlocking financial interests. In one study, the agency failed to document the financial interests of applicants in 31 percent of applications for new-drug approval. Even when the agency or the company knew of a potential conflict of interest, neither acted to guard against bias in the test results. Because of the deference shown to drug companies by the F.D.A.—and also by Congress, which has failed to impose any meaningful regulation—there is no mandatory public record of the results of drug trials conducted in foreign countries. Nor is there any mandatory public oversight of ongoing trials. If one company were to test an experimental drug that killed more patients than it helped, and kept the results secret, another company might unknowingly repeat the same experiment years later, with the same results. Data is made available to the public on a purely voluntary basis. Its accuracy is unknown. The oversight that does exist often is shot through with the kinds of ethical conflicts that Wall Street would admire. The economic incentives for doctors in poor countries to heed the wishes of the drug companies are immense.
The F.D.A. gets its information on foreign trials almost entirely from the companies themselves. It conducts little or no independent research. The investigators contracted by the pharmaceutical companies to manage clinical trials are left pretty much on their own. In 2008 the F.D.A. inspected just 1.9 percent of trial sites inside the United States to ensure that they were complying with basic standards. Outside the country, it inspected even fewer trial sites—seven-tenths of 1 percent.
In addition to monitoring trials abroad, which it does not really do, the F.D.A. is responsible for inspecting drug-manufacturing plants in other countries, which it also does not really do. The FDA does not always know where clinical trials are being conducted, or even the names or types of drugs being tested, or the purpose for which they will be prescribed once approved. Companies may withhold the foreign test data until they actually submit the application to the F.D.A. for approval. By then, the agency has lost the ability to see whether the trials were managed according to acceptable standards, and whether the data collected was manipulated or fabricated.
If the globalization of clinical trials for adult medications has drawn little attention, foreign trials for children’s drugs have attracted even less attention. For years, American physicians gave anti-psychotic medicines to children “off label,” meaning that they wrote prescriptions based on testing for adults, sometimes even for different conditions. That didn’t work out so well for the children, who, when it comes to medicine, really are not just little adults. To provide the pharmaceutical industry with an incentive to conduct clinical trials on children’s versions of adult drugs, Congress in 1997 enacted legislation, known as the Pediatric Exclusivity Provision, extending the patent life of certain drugs by six months. It worked so well that the industry has, in the ensuing years, been able to put younger and younger children on more and more drugs, pocketing an extra $14 billion. Between 1999 and 2007, for instance, the use of anti-psychotic medications on children between the ages of two and five more than doubled.
In theory, pharmaceutical companies are barred from selling a drug for any purpose other than the one that the F.D.A. has approved on the basis of clinical testing. But the reality is different. The minute a drug receives the green light from the F.D.A. for a specific treatment, the sponsoring company and its allies begin campaigns to make it available for other purposes or for other types of patients. Physicians, often on retainer from pharmaceutical companies, are free to prescribe a drug for any reason if they entertain a belief that it will work. This practice turns the population at large into unwitting guinea pigs whose adverse reactions may go unreported or even unrecognized.
The annual American death toll from prescription drugs considered “safe” is around 200,000. That is three times the number of people who die every year from diabetes, four times the number who die from kidney disease. Overall, deaths from F.D.A.-approved prescription drugs dwarf the number of people who die from street drugs such as cocaine and heroin. They dwarf the number who die every year in automobile accidents. So far, these deaths have triggered no medical crusades, no tough new regulations. After a dozen or so deaths linked to runaway Toyotas, Japanese executives were summoned to appear before lawmakers in Washington and were subjected to an onslaught of humiliating publicity. When the pharmaceutical industry meets with lawmakers, it is mainly to provide campaign contributions. And with more and more of its activities moving overseas, the industry’s behavior will become more impenetrable, and more dangerous, than ever.
The leaders of the pharmaceutical and chemical industries control a great part of our society and human life through controlling what we eat (all the pesticides and preservatives in our food and now in the form of genetically engineered foods), and then when we get sick from these products of theirs, they control the medical industry and a whole array of drugs (also highly toxic as demonstrated by the list of side effects provided with each drug) that we are programmed to take when we begin to feel ill.
It is not commonly known that pharmaceutical interests control medical research and medical schools and have most health professionals dependent on them. They have moved into crucial branches of government and for all practical purposes control the FDA and the CDC because many of the people who work inside of these organizations, whose sole purpose is to protect the public, come from the giant pharmaceutical companies and hold stock in them.
Chemical and pharmaceutical companies are in the business of manufacturing poisonous chemicals and drugs for the purpose of making money, so much so that these industries have produced the wealthiest people the world has ever seen. That is spelled P-O-I-S-O-N like in danger, hazard, beware, and handle-with-care types of substances that you do not want around your children.
When we investigate these companies and their history we enter a disgusting subject area inhabited by people who can only be defined as monsters. Historically we are talking about the same people that stood behind and supported Adolf Hitler. The U.S. government investigation of the factors that led to the Second World War in 1946 came to the conclusion that without IG Farben, the Second World War would simply not have been possible so they decided to break up the behemoth chemical and pharmaceutical giant after the war.
It was not a psychopath, Adolph Hitler, or bad genes of the German people that brought about the Second World War. Economic greed and an incredible ugliness of spirit inherent in companies like Bayer, BASF and Hoechst brought about the Holocaust. And it is another historic fact that companies on both sides of the Atlantic were implicated in the financial and industrial structures that led to the greatest killing machine that the world had ever known. That machine continues on and it is an international army of doctors and nurses that now carry out the dirty deeds of sick companies and people.
When it comes to medicine and vaccines, it is important to free our minds from the overriding conditioning that has been imprinted into our brains like circuit boards. What we will find in history takes us right into the present, into a nightmare of unprecedented proportions, into the face of darkness that the world has tasted and forgotten, only to be hit again with the same ugliness but this time on a scale that encircles the globe.
When it comes to medicine we all look to the FDA and the CDC, the AMA and the APA for comfort and trust that what we eat, take as medicine, and give to our children in the form of vaccines is safe. It is these people and organizations with whom we blindly place our trust and our faith. What a huge mistake.
The sick-care system is intentionally engineered to give you cancer, keep you sick, and keep you locked into a medical system that enriches powerful corporations while sacrificing human life!
The federal government is murdering thousands of people a week with FDA-sanctioned medicine and they get cheered for their actions by the voters who are swept off their feet by political promises and lies. The Americans just voted in a man who reads an assassination hit list at his breakfast table and who sends in unmanned drones to attack people sleeping in the night and would force modern medicine with all its horrid ways down the throats of Americans forgetting completely what America once stood for.
About 5,000 Americans will die this week in hospitals, 2,000 of them from properly prescribed medicine, but few really care.
Most good doctors like to have all the available facts about a prescription drug before prescribing it. However, when it comes to pharmaceutical medicines, it’s nearly impossible to find real data, so doctors really never know the true dangers about the drugs they use. Not only are they not sure about the side effects and the possibility of death but they are also not sure whether or not the drug will help the patient at all. In short, modern medicine is based on research fraud and we find doctors and medical officials, including the FDA, abandoning their public health mission by revolving everything they do and promote around pharmaceutical interests. Anything non-pharmaceutical in nature is patently condemned.
Drug manufacturers fund trials of their own products in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analyzed using techniques that are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments. When trials throw up results that companies don’t like, they are perfectly entitled to hide them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see a distorted picture of any drug’s true effects. This dishonest, inaccurate and incomplete representation of many of the pharmaceutical drugs coming to market is what most doctors are basing their holy allopathic medical practices on. What kind of medical science do we have when negative scientific information is not published, not accessible to practitioners, denied, repressed and simply not included in medical conclusions?
There is nothing real about orthodox oncology. How such inaccurate ideas like those of modern oncology could be born in an intelligent race of beings is beyond comprehension. It is believed that cancer is caused by an accumulation of mutations in cells of the body, but inflammation, increases the mutation rate and might be a key player in inflammation-induced cancers generally. Chronic inflammation, due to infection or to conditions such as chronic inflammatory bowel disease, is associated with up to 25% of all cancers. Chemotherapy and radiation only make inflammation worse!
These are not instruments of cancer treatment and everyone knows that they have nothing to do with cancer cures, which are illegal anyway. Doctors rarely talk about “curing” cancer. Instead, the success of treatment is judged on whether a patient is alive five, 10 and 15 years after diagnosis. But are they really better? As an example, when a person is treated for breast cancer and it moves from the breast to another area, but they live five years after the breast cancer has been diagnosed, it is recorded as a survival from breast cancer.
When there is cancer there is low O2, low CO2, low pH (acidity) and low cellular energy; there are parasitic scavengers fighting for their existence. Mix in some inflammation, heavy-metal and chemical contamination and nutritional deficiency and you have the recipe for CANCER—a beast that is eating the human race alive, starting with the old but now increasingly working its way down to the very young where death should not be lurking.
Almost every day we are hearing medical horror stories that should completely frighten the public away from their doctors’ offices. Orthodox oncologists use treatments and diagnostic procedures that cause cancer to treat and diagnose cancer. A perfect example is mammography. Every mammogram a woman gets increases her risk of breast cancer by 5% due to the radiation involved and mammograms frequently lead to over-diagnosis and unnecessary treatment.
The cause of cancer has very little to do with genetics. We know some basic things about why cancer starts. We know it is initiated under low-oxygen conditions. We know that it is initiated also by trauma and especially by inflammation. We know with low-oxygen conditions and inflammation we have infectious agents running around out of control. Tumor promotion and progression are dependent on ancillary processes provided by cells of the tumor environment but that are not necessarily cancerous themselves.
Inflammation has long been associated with the development of cancer. Chemical and genetic changes occur as inflammation progresses to cancer. One of the biggest risk factors for liver, colon or stomach cancer is chronic inflammation of those organs, often caused by viral or bacterial infections. In 2008 French researchers found that one in six cancers are caused by treatable infections. Helicobacter pylori, hepatitis B and C viruses, and human papillomaviruses were responsible for 1.9 million cases, mainly gastric, liver, and cervix uteri cancers. In women, cervix uteri cancer accounted for about half of the infection-related burden of cancer; in men, liver and gastric cancers accounted for more than 80%. Around 30% of infection-attributable cases occur in people younger than 50 years.
When there is a plane crash in the U.S., even a minor one, it makes headlines. There is a thorough federal investigation, and the tragedy often yields important lessons for the aviation industry. Pilots and airlines thus learn how to do their jobs more safely.
The world of American medicine is far deadlier: Medical mistakes kill enough people each week to fill four jumbo jets. But these mistakes go largely unnoticed by the world at large, and the medical community rarely learns from them. The same preventable mistakes are made over and over again, and patients are left in the dark about which hospitals have significantly better (or worse) safety records than their peers.
Statistically speaking hospitals are hazardous to our health. The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that nearly 100,000 people die annually in hospitals just from medical errors alone! Another 100,000 die from properly prescribed medicines!
As doctors swear to do no harm, on the job they soon absorb another unspoken rule: to overlook the mistakes of their colleagues. The problem is vast. U.S. surgeons operate on the wrong body part as often as 40 times a week. Roughly a quarter of all hospitalized patients will be harmed by a medical error of some kind. If medical errors were a disease, they would be the sixth leading cause of death in America—just behind accidents and ahead of Alzheimer's. The human toll aside, medical errors cost the U.S. health-care system tens of billions a year. Some 20% to 30% of all medications, tests and procedures are unnecessary, according to research done by medical specialists, surveying their own fields. What other industry misses the mark this often?
The answers are not to found in the world of pharmaceuticals. Combination or a protocol approach to medicine is theoretically impossible with pharmaceutical drugs because it is impossible to predict how toxic poisons (drugs) will mix together to worsen side effects or create a toxic shock that kills a patient. When we take several drugs simultaneously we only increase the dangers.
FDA-approved prescription drugs kill 290 Americans every single day, meaning that for mass shootings to approach that number, you'd have to see a Colorado Batman movie massacre take place EVERY HOUR of every day, 365 days a year. That's how dangerous doctors and FDA-approved prescription medications really are.
Hospitals as a whole also tend to escape accountability, with excessive complication rates even at institutions that the public trusts as top-notch. Very few hospitals publish statistics on their performance, so how do patients pick one?
Modern medicine has lost its balance making hospitals one of the most dangerous places to be. They are often places that increase our chances of death through medical negligence and ignorance. Certainly they are places that threaten most patients and even countries with bankruptcy because most people and governments cannot afford a form of medicine that is in and of itself a mistake. The situation in hospitals is deteriorating very quickly as drug-resistant germs are leaving doctors helpless.
Hospitals have served as the cornerstone of modern healthcare systems around the world. Most people today are born in hospitals. Hospitals are those places that touch us most intimately during episodes of severe sickness or disease. Hospitals are predominately where our loved ones go to die and where the rest of us go to see our loved ones suffer agonizing deaths.
Also, if you go to a hospital, the odds are increasing dramatically that the drugs you need will be unavailable. The growing scarcity of sterile, injectable drugs is one of the biggest issues confronting hospitals across the country. Health officials blame the shortages on industry consolidation that has left only a handful of generic manufacturers of these drugs, even as the number of drugs going off-patent is growing. Some medicines have been periodically short in the past, doctors and pharmacists say, but the number of drug shortages has escalated in recent years, jumping from 56 in 2006 to 250 last year, according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration figures.
If anyone knows whether a hospital is safe, it's the people who work there. In an anonymous survey of doctors, nurses, technicians and other employees at 60 U.S. hospitals it was found that at one-third of them, most employees believed the teamwork was bad. These aren't hospitals where you or I want to receive care or see our family members receive care. At other hospitals, by contrast, an impressive 99% of the staff reported good teamwork.
Americans take more prescription drugs than anyone else on the planet. According to the CDC, approximately 750,000 Americans are rushed to the emergency room each year because of reactions to prescription drugs. At least 200,000 Americans each year end up dying from reactions to prescription drugs. Unfortunately, the big pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars advertising their pills in the mainstream media, so the mainstream media has a very strong incentive to cover up the truth.
Allopathic medical doctors are forced to be more interested in their licenses and following the lockstep of a type of medicine that hurts more people than it helps. Most people put blind trust in these card-carrying doctors who refuse to look beyond what is mandated by the AMA and the FDA. Oncologists are cornered and have no choice but to put the law ahead of the wellbeing of their patients. It is a sad state of affairs when doctors are forced to abuse their patients because of laws and governmental medical rules that dictate which treatments are legal and which are not. Today, to stand behind the law is to become alien to the truth about how to best care for patients and address their needs. We have cruel laws administered by cruel people and aggressive institutions that have no right to accept responsibility for the health and wellbeing of any human being.
The sickest joke in the world of medicine, besides vaccines, is professional dieticians and nutritionists. One of the biggest crimes in progress is these professional nutritionists’ attempts to corner the market on nutritional advice. The truth is if you take their advice you will probably end up dead before your time. Hospital nutrition is a mirror of the profession’s ignorance. These nutritional “experts” insist that the best way to get vitamins is through a healthy diet—that is why their professional advice is so unwelcome to both patients and doctors alike. This is simply not true because food is not what it used to be in terms of nutritional value.
The Basic American Diet does not provide even the RDA. Two-thirds of all meals are eaten outside the home, and nearly half of them are in fast-food joints. You can’t expect this to provide all the necessary nutrients, and many studies show that it does not. A large number of people admitted to hospitals are found to have deficiencies, and the problem worsens once they’re in the hospital. Just about everyone who needs hospital care for chronic illness is malnourished.
It is pathetic that neither doctors nor hospitals have gotten their bearings regarding the benefits of quality nutrition. Nutrition in hospitals is terrible and that goes for the actual food they serve, whether they feed through the stomach or use intravenous administration of fluids.
We know that those who are given or are already taking supplements have a lower rate of complications, are discharged sooner from the hospital and are much less likely to die. All forms of surgery are safer if patients are given magnesium before, during and after surgery. Intravenous infusion is particularly useful when reestablishing nutritional health during or after intense treatments, with magnesium being one of the most important substances to use.
Many people are losing faith in the medical profession because most doctors are unwilling to accept what is becoming common knowledge: Nutrition and nutrient therapies are safer, cheaper and more effective than most other medical treatment. Too many doctors incorrectly reject the idea that there are large-scale nutritional deficiencies in the general public. They are short-sighted and narrow-minded.
The vitamin and mineral deficiencies so prevalent in modern society are due to the fact that these nutrients are removed from our foods by industrial food processing. The foods that most people eat are high in sugar and are processed and denatured of essential nutrients.
Patients need adequate nutrition, not drugs, to recover from any illness, and sometimes they need that really fast. Patients who are critically ill have high nutritional requirements that need to be addressed and ER doctors know that it is often a matter of life or death. Nutritional feeding is critical to patient outcome and if death is near, intravenous and cutaneous injections are the proper emergency approaches to nutrition.
If you look at almost any other system of medicine besides the Western, you’ll find a heavy reliance on food. Hippocrates, the father of modern medicine, after whom the Hippocratic oath was named, taught, “let food be thy medicine.” The “foods” of modern medicine, however are drugs. The typical American doctor completely disregards nutrition. Those who are concerned with nutrition are labeled as faddists, freaks, extremists, radicals and quacks.
Why aren’t our doctors telling us about this and trying to do something to change it? Many people think that medical physicians are experts in nutrition because they seem to know some things about the human body. Well, physicians may be great at saving lives in an emergency or for relieving pain temporarily, but very few are taught to prevent illness. Hard-working and dedicated, they are highly trained to diagnose illness (symptoms), administer drugs and perform surgical procedures. Their schooling demands so much time for pharmacology (drug therapy) that they have little time for studying nutrition. What scant information they do receive is usually outdated and less detailed than that which nurses and technicians receive in their training.
A very small percentage of doctors specialize in preventive medicine, but most better fit the description given by Dr. Julian B. Schorr of the New York Blood Center, in a January 1971 Wall Street Journal article by Mary Bralove: “Often doctors are trained in nutrition by doctors who heard it from another doctor who made it up.” Yet they believe what they say is true and get upset when they’re contradicted.
The average physician is not a nutrition imbecile, he can recognize overweight, gross malnutrition and other nutritional problems. But physicians usually get out of their area of expertise when they talk about dietary cholesterol, subclinical scurvy and long-term dietary studies. Time (December 18, 1972, p. 75) quoted Dr. Michael Latham of Cornell University’s Graduate School of Nutrition: “Nine out of ten doctors in New York City would give wrong answers to dietary questions.”
Senator Richard S. Schweiker of Pennsylvania, a member of the Senate Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, said “I am particularly concerned about the need for better practical nutrition education for our doctors. The advice of family doctors carries a great deal of weight with most people. But, unfortunately, most doctors simply do not receive sufficient training in nutrition while they are at medical school to enable them to give sound advice on nutrition that we urgently need...”
The 1969 White House Conference on Food, Nutrition and Health concluded, “The effectiveness of physicians in providing optimal care for the many patients who have diseases with an important nutritional component is dependent in considerable part on the kind of nutrition teaching offered them at medical school and thereafter. At the present time, nutrition teaching in medical schools and in teaching hospitals is woefully inadequate.” Medical schools with nutrition departments are rare. Most don’t even offer separate courses in nutrition but mingle what little they do offer in an elementary chemistry course. Not one medical school can honestly say it teaches nutrition seriously. An open mind is needed by all, not dogmatic opinions from out-of-date “experts.”
When the average physician is asked, “What should I eat?” The typical answer is “Just eat a balanced diet.” If you want to know what an average physician thinks a balanced diet is, look at any hospital food fed to patients, doctors, staff and visitors. The mutually-exclusive roles of dietician and cook are nowhere more apparent than in such institutions. All are identical. Iceberg lettuce, with a glob of cottage cheese, and a wedge of canned pineapple. Slices of overdone and warmed-over beef that have suffered for hours in some electronic purgatory, coated with gravy made of water, library paste, and bouillon cubes. Peas, corn, and carrots—boiled. The pie is a sickening slab of beige goo, flavored with artificial maple sugar, in a crust of reconstituted cardboard, topped with sweetened shaving cream squirted from an aerosol bomb.
The problem is that the dieticians who actually supervise such “cooking”—as well as the hapless agents of the FDA and the USDA who inspect the forced and faked-up products that go into it—can indeed prove that it contains the proper amount of protein, carbohydrate, minerals and vitamins. But this is like judging the worth of music in terms of decibels and wave frequencies.
George Blackburn, M.D., an associate professor at Harvard Medical School, said that 5% of all patients who die in American hospitals—50,000 people—starve to death, and their doctors don’t realize it. Less extreme malnutrition hastens death in 160,000 cases and delays recovery in 330,000 cases, Dr. Blackburn said. In other studies on hospital nutrition, it was revealed that malnutrition is one of the most common causes of death among elderly people in hospitals. Then there’s the soft drink, candy and cigarette vending machines strategically placed throughout the hospital. The hospital gets a percentage of everything sold in these machines.
What is provided in hospitals for patients to eat is far from healthy. In fact, what they feed patients will inhibit healing. The average post-operative patient in a hospital is fed chicken broth from bouillon, diet sorbet, decaffeinated coffee, diet Jello, and something labeled fruit ice. You would think that a post-surgery patient, in the hospital, would be given healthy food to help heal their body. There is nothing nutritious in any of the items they serve.
This type of diet is called a clear liquid diet and is the first thing offered to post-surgical patients to ensure that the intestines that have been paralyzed by anesthesia are “waking up” and able to move the liquids through the intestinal tract. But there are much better choices than diet Jello that contains, in part: aspartame (yikes!), acesulfame, potassium, salt, red 40 and artificial flavor. Gelatin made with REAL juice and without the toxic artificial sweeteners would be infinitely better. (And the same can be said for the diet sorbet.)
It is tragic to realize that food itself is no longer a sufficient therapy for malnutrition. The nutritional profiles of foods have been steadily dropping; and even an orange is not what it used to be in terms of vitamin C. Hospitals need to get creative and come up with better diets for the patients as well as better intravenous solutions and more nutritious ingredients for the feeding tubes.
Oral supplementation and a healthy diet alone may not achieve the desired medical muscle to resolve diseased conditions. When vitamins are delivered intravenously they reach the blood faster than when taken orally. Many people who receive the infusions report feeling the results immediately afterward.
Intravenous medicine provides a method of increasing nutrient absorption so that the body can become healthy enough to heal itself. Intravenous medicine is a safe and effective therapy using natural substances in high quantities, which enables accelerated healing for optimal health. Much higher nutrient concentration levels can be achieved by the intravenous route without the side effects that occur by the oral route.
There is a therapeutic catch-22 in cellular health: The cells need to be healthy enough to have enough energy to bring in the nutrients required for repair, but a sick cell may not be able to do so even if those nutrients are around. In order to have a therapeutic effect, nutrients need to be adequately absorbed and delivered to the cell. Intravenous administration of nutrients makes nutrients more readily available and easier to transport inside the cells. By providing higher nutrient concentration in the blood than what can be achieved orally, cells are no longer reliant on energy-dependent mechanisms to transport nutrients inside. Nutrients can enter cells via passive transport, requiring less energy than active transport.
When foods and supplements are taken orally, the gastrointestinal track breaks them down to release the core nutrients and transport those nutrients to the blood for delivery to the cells requiring them. This requires many steps and is dependent on numerous variables being intact, including optimal enzyme activity, proper acid production, healthy gut flora, healthy gastrointestinal lining free of inflammation and irritation, absence of “bad” bacteria, healthy peristaltic tone (pumping action of the GI tract), and others. After nutrients are transported to the blood, they are then delivered to the liver. A compromised liver can make certain nutrients inactive, ineffective, or bound for excretion before given the opportunity to have their effect in the body.
Administering vitamins and minerals intravenously helps avoid many of the problems of taking large doses by mouth. IV therapy helps correct low nutrient levels more quickly and without the potential side effects like diarrhea and heartburn that often accompany oral doses of vitamins and minerals.
Though nutrients may have numerous effects on the body, some of these effects are attained only after reaching very high levels. For example, vitamin C has been demonstrated to have an antiviral effect at high serum concentrations of 10-15 mg/dL. These levels are not achievable via the oral route even in a healthy individual. The highest plasma concentration achieved through oral administration of vitamin C is 9.2 mg/dL. This means that no matter how much vitamin C someone ingests, they will be unable to raise their blood levels beyond a certain point.
A high dose of 2.5 grams/day of vitamin C will raise the serum concentration to only about 1.2-1.5 mg/dl. Even if we could achieve higher serum concentrations from super-dosing of vitamin C, such high oral dosing often causes disagreeable gastrointestinal side effects such as diarrhea and nausea. A similar effect is found with magnesium supplementation, where oral supplementation has a peak serum concentration beyond which even super-dosing with oral magnesium cannot surpass.
Nutrients delivered intravenously provide high enough concentrations to elicit a pharmacological (drug-like) effect on cells, which can only be achieved at such high levels. For example, vitamin C can have a viral killing effect but only at very high plasma concentrations. Thus, IVNT (intravenous nutrient therapy) allows for natural substances to have a drug-like effect without the side effects and dangers of using synthetic and toxic drugs!
Amino acids, glutathione, vitamin C, Myers’ cocktail (B complex, vitamin C, magnesium, dexpenthanol B5, calcium, B12, B6), phosphatidylcholine, chelating agents, sodium bicarbonate, minerals, multi-vitamins, antioxidants, herbal and homeopathic medicines all have been applied intravenously. IV infusion is an effective way to administer nutrients and other medications when disease or treatment side effects limit your ability to swallow pills or liquids.
When we start to dream of the perfect IV we have to think about the sea. Ocean water has had an illustrious history in medicine. Seawater has many therapeutic uses based on the concept of renewing, purifying and regenerating the internal fluid environment, as well as maintaining vital equilibrium. Dr. Rene Quinton, French biologist/physiologist, proved that pure seawater is virtually identical to mammalian blood plasma. He successfully used seawater as a healing agent on thousands of patients in France and Egypt in the early 1900s.
Navy doctors successfully used seawater during the Second World War when blood serum supplies ran out. Many conditions responded to injections of ocean water because re-mineralizing the sick body, normalizing pH and balancing electrolytes work together to correct the underlying cause of many disease conditions by regenerating the “internal terrain.”
Marine-based therapy encourages cellular regeneration and cellular nutrition and this was used to great effect a century ago. Babies were brought back from near death from cholera and other causes; cadaver-like bodies filled out to healthy plumpness; raw, weeping skin from eczema became smooth and lesion-free, all by the power of seawater.
Any IV treatment carries a risk of bruising, infection and vein inflammation. That is why they are best administered by professionals. Doctors, nurses and naturopaths are trained to routinely administer nutrients and medicines this way, and in emergency situations this is essential medicine.
The mainstream medical media has been showing off its stupidity by writing up bad copy about intravenous medicine, saying, “There’s little evidence the practice has any health benefits.” All of these sources might as well be saying that we should trash emergency room and intensive care medicine. The truth is there are alternatives to this kind of medicine and they can be practiced at home without medical supervision. Through intense oral and transdermal administration, a person can do almost everything necessary to bring himself back from the edge—but there are times when an IV is what will save the day.
12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;
7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;
20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;
80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;
106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.
The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.
This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease and cancer. The annual death toll from synthetic prescription drugs, both from the correctly prescribed and the incorrectly prescribed, amounts to about 231,000 deaths every year. To put this into perspective, this is the equivalent of a world trade center disaster every week for over a year and a half or the crash of two fully loaded 747 aircraft every day of the year.
2.1 million people in America, every year, are hospitalized as a result of reactions to FDA-approved medicines. Annually, 36 million serious adverse reactions to those drugs occur. Labeled mental disorders are not based on factual biological evidence. At least 300,000 people are suffering from brain damage (tardive dyskinesia) as a result of being administered major tranquilizers.
So, inclusive health coverage for many more Americans under the Obama Plan means these horrendous figures will rise. This is the dirty secret. Obama and his allies are promoting a medical system that is the third leading cause of death in America. It’s that stark and it’s that simple. The Obama Plan involves appointing an “expert panel” to decide what treatments Americans should be given for what diseases, under the new regime. This insurance plan will capture more and more of the population in the cross-hairs of chemical warfare. No amount of squirming or arguing is going to change that.
The #1 killer in our society is not cancer or heart disease. The #1 killer is the health care system itself (something doctors call iatrogenic death). This includes death from:
- Surgical errors
- Hospital-acquired infections
- Diagnostic machines
- Hospital-acquired malnutrition
To protect yourself, particularly when it comes to your prescription drugs, obviously, you can't depend on the namby-pamby FDA to protect you from unsafe drugs.
The fact is, FDA scientists live under enormous pressure from their supervisors to keep information about side effects to themselves, knowing their jobs and promotions are at stake. In turn, supervisors are pressured by influential politicians and bureaucrats who receive support of various kinds from powerful pharmaceutical companies.
The government's own General Accounting Office found that up to 50% of drugs approved by the FDA had serious post-approval side effects!
Pharmaceutical companies donate as much as 10 million dollars to major medical schools (What do you think they want in return?). Brainwashing continues after medical school as drug companies spend 2.5 billion dollars wooing doctors through sponsored educational seminars, visits to pharmaceutical headquarters and 315,000 parties and events.
Studies published in medical journals are often ghostwritten by pharmaceutical company scientists (And of course, most doctors believe what they read in these "reputable" journals).
Shameful scare tactic are used to frighten elderly people into getting flu shots they don't really need (And even puts them at higher risk for Alzheimer's).
Magnesium is a vital mineral whose lack leaves us open to not only damage from radiation but also damage from heavy metals and the thousands of chemicals to which we are commonly exposed. Without sufficient magnesium, the body accumulates toxins and acid residues, degenerates rapidly, and ages prematurely.
Because magnesium deficiency wreaks havoc with our cell physiology and worsens as we age, appropriate magnesium supplementation will not only help ensure we don’t age so fast but it also will prevent many of the major diseases we are facing today. Research published in the American Journal of Epidemiology in 2002 showed that when the diets of 2,566 children ages 11-19 were studied, less than 14% of boys and 12% of girls had adequate intakes of magnesium.
When magnesium is deficient, things begin to die, but when our body’s magnesium levels are topped off, our body physiology tends to hum along like a racecar yielding higher performance along many physiological parameters. Most doctors do not want to acknowledge that magnesium deficiency can lead directly to cancer, thus to a significantly shorter life. The same goes for diabetes and heart disease—magnesium deficiency brings on these diseases.
Magnesium operates at the core of physiology offering us what can only be called scientific miracles in medicine. All of life collapses around its loss.
Almost all the prescription drugs currently taken by millions of people lead to a gradual depletion of vitamins and other essential cellular nutrients in the body. Anything that drives down magnesium levels is going to hurt us. Many pharmaceutical drugs drive magnesium levels into dangerous zones.
The most perfect medicine in the world is the one you have to have—no matter what—to continue your life. There are certain substances, all nutritional in nature, that provide essential lifelines to happy and fully functional cells. Though contemporary medicine does not want to admit the truth and reality about diseases and their causes, it is clear that nutritional law holds the key to the resolution of disease—not pharmaceuticals that are toxic and damaging to cellular environments.
Vitamins A, B-12, C, E, K, Biotin, Calcium, Iron, Magnesium, Potassium
Copper, Iron, Magnesium, Zinc
Vitamins B-2, B-12, C, F, K, Folic Acid, Calcium, Magnesium
Vitamins B-2, B-12, C, D, Folic Acid
Calcium, Folic Acid, Iron, Potassium, Vitamins C, B Complex
Beta-adrenergic agonists (for asthma)
Corticosteroids (CS) (for asthma)
Theophylline (for asthma)
Phosphates (found in cola drinks)
The FDA is informing the public that prescription proton pump inhibitor (PPI) drugs may cause low serum magnesium levels (hypomagnesemia) if taken for prolonged periods of time (in most cases, longer than one year). Information about the potential risk of low serum magnesium levels from PPIs will be added to the WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS sections of the labels.
In 2009, approximately 21 million patients filled prescriptions for proton pump inhibitor (PPI) drugs that drive magnesium serum levels down. In approximately one-quarter of the cases reviewed, magnesium supplementation alone did not improve low serum magnesium levels and the PPI drugs had to be discontinued. This would not have been the case if researchers had been more knowledgeable about magnesium supplementation and how to more effectively administer it.
Hypomagnesemia is under-recognized and under-reported, yet clinically serious adverse events are commonly reported symptoms of hypomagnesemia. One of the hidden dangers of hypomagnesemia is that it produces impaired parathyroid hormone secretion, which may lead to hypocalcemia.
A low intake of magnesium increases the risk of developing and/or dying from cardiovascular disease or stroke. Thus increasing the magnesium intake from water is beneficial, especially for populations with an insufficient dietary intake of the mineral, which means everyone. Yet the American government chooses to put highly toxic fluoride in the public water systems instead of magnesium.
The UN’s World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that drinking water contain 25-50 mg of magnesium per liter to prevent deaths from heart attack and stroke. American bottled water averages < 5 mg of magnesium (Mg) per liter, while bottled water in the rest of the world averages about 20 mg of magnesium per liter.
Americans are very deficient in Mg, as evidenced by the 23% shortfall from the RDI, yet the FDA and DOJ have covered up keeping silent about the millions of deaths indicated by over 50 epidemiological studies from nine countries. Recent studies clearly confirm that water-borne Mg is far, far better in preventing cardiovascular pathologies than food-borne Mg.
Ideally water should contain 100 mg of magnesium per liter. Normally one has to add pure magnesium chloride to one’s water supply to attain such optimal levels. You can just add a few sprays of Ancient Minerals magnesium oil to a little cup of water and chug it down; it can taste pretty strong but it makes an excellent nutritional supplement. You can add some cherry concentrate (which is itself high in minerals) to make it palatable.
People who have had magnesium injections for years to prevent spasms in their arteries and veins have been able to get off of the injections by consuming enough magnesium-rich water. When treating oneself for magnesium deficiency, which occurs easily from drinking magnesium-deficient water and eating a host of processed “white” foods, there is nothing like the transdermal approach to recover one’s cellular magnesium levels.
Drugs are generally synthetic, non-natural substances that we absorb in our bodies. Our bodies recognize these synthetic drugs as ‘toxic,’ just like any other non-natural substance. Thus, all synthetic drugs have to be ‘detoxified’ by the liver in order to eliminate them from our bodies. This detoxification process requires vitamin C and other cellular nutrients as cofactors. Many of these essential nutrients are used up in biological (enzymatic) reactions during this detoxification process. One of the most common ways for eliminating drugs from our bodies is called hydroxylation. The strongest ‘hydroxylating agent’ in our body is vitamin C, which is literally destroyed during this detoxification process. Thus, long-term use of many synthetic prescription drugs leads to chronic vitamin C depletion in the body, a form of early scurvy, and the onset of cardiovascular disease.
The history of the decline of infectious disease is a history of improved sanitation, alleviation of overcrowding, the rise of the middle class, and above all, the betterment of nutrition. This decline in disease occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread vaccination.
These are the figures on the last several “epidemics.” They are not yearly; they are grand totals, to date; global totals, except in the case of West Nile (US only):
SARS: 774 deaths.
WEST NILE: 1159 deaths.
BIRD FLU: 262 deaths.
SMALLPOX: (terrorist threat): 0 deaths.
SWINE FLU: 25,000 deaths.
To give perspective, globally, 250 thousand to 500 thousand people die of ordinary flu-like illness every year. Yet this higher death rate accrues no interest as an epidemic. It is only the “teaching (brainwashing) moments” of the phony epidemics that are promoted by health agencies (e.g., CDC and WHO) and their pharmaceutical allies, who rake in billions by manufacturing new vaccines.
In his latest (1999) book, Radiation from Medical Procedures in the Pathogenesis of Cancer and Ischemic Heart Disease: Dose-Response Studies with Physicians per 100,000 Population, Dr. John Gofman, Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California, Berkeley, and a member of the faculty at the University of California Medical School at San Francisco, presents strong evidence that medical radiation is a major cause of cancer and of atherosclerosis (coronary heart disease). By medical radiation, Dr. Gofman is referring mainly to X-rays, including fluoroscopy and CT (CAT) scans. The mechanism is simple to state: Radiation causes genetic mutations that eventually give rise to disease. Gofman is not saying that medical radiation is necessarily the only cause of cancer and coronary heart disease. He does not mean that cancer is not caused by smoking, poor diet, genetic inheritance, pesticides, diesel exhaust, dioxin and toxic chemicals encountered on the job. Cancer and heart disease both have multiple causes. For cancer (or an atherosclerotic plaque) to develop, a cell must undergo several separate gene mutations. Most occur from exposure to gene-damaging substances in the environment. Gofman is not opposed to medical X-rays. Rather, he is opposed to unnecessary exposure from X-rays. He and others have shown over the years that medical X-ray exposures in the U.S. could be cut by at least 50% with no loss of medical information. The careful use of modern X-ray equipment and techniques can reduce X-ray exposure by half (or more) without sacrificing any medical benefits. Thus, at least half the cancers caused by medical X-rays are completely unnecessary.
Dr. Gofman calculates that in 1993, 50% of all cancers in women and 74% of all cancers in men were attributable to X-rays. About 500,000 people die of cancer each year in the US. If 60% of these deaths are attributable to X-rays and half are unnecessary, we are talking about 150,000 unnecessary cancer deaths each year in the U.S. Gofman calculates that the proportion of coronary heart disease (CHD) attributable to X-rays is slightly higher than the proportion of cancers. Among men in 1993, 63% of CHD deaths were attributable to X-rays, and 78% among women. So, in rough numbers, 70% of CHD deaths are attributable to X-rays, Gofman believes. Since CHD caused roughly 460,000 deaths in the U.S. in 1993, then, if Gofman is right, 70% (or 322,000) of these deaths are attributable to X-rays and half of these (or 161,000) are unnecessary. He found disease statistics for the entire U.S. population, broken down into nine census districts (1940 to 1990 for cancer, and 1950 to 1990 for coronary heart disease). Then he correlated these disease statistics, year by year, to the number of physicians per 100,000 population in each of the nine census districts. The density of physicians per 100,000 population provides a relative measure of the medical radiation per 100,000 population in the nine districts by year.
Gofman has shown that cancer death rates rise in lock-step with increasing density of physicians in a census district, while non-cancer deaths decline in lock-step with increasing density of physicians per 100,000 population, except in the case of coronary heart disease which follows the rising pattern of cancer. Thus, Gofman’s hypothesis, that CHD is linked to medical radiation, “fell out of the data.”
Because he had decades of experience researching the causes of CHD (he has written three books on heart disease), and because he knows the radiation literature so well, Gofman was able to put two and two together: Radiation induces mutations in the coronary arteries, giving rise to what he calls dysfunctional clones (mini-tumors) in the smooth muscle lining the arteries. Using his “physician density” method, Gofman estimates that medical radiation caused 83% of female breast cancer in the US in 1993. Using a completely different method, Gofman estimated in 1995 that medical radiation was responsible for 75% of US breast cancer. The two estimates, by two completely different methods, are remarkably similar.
The ignorance of modern cardiology is vast. Medical researchers are now headed down a bizarre path that subjects trusting heart patients to high-dose gamma radiation pellets in their arteries! High-dose beta radiation, delivered along with balloon angioplasty or stenting, using intracoronary beta radiation in the treatment of lesions and re-stenosis (re-narrowing of an artery). Cardiologists and heart surgeons are confronted with serious after effects in their patients due to conventional treatments. Re-stenosis (plaque growth) caused by smooth muscle cell proliferation, is common after heart surgery and angioplasty.
Neointimal hyperplasia, is a common response to injury of the vessel wall during angioplasty. The American Heart Association estimates that the coronary arteries re-occlude after surgery in 40% of the patients under the care of cardiologists. Re-stenosis remains a major clinical challenge in interventional cardiology today. The new “high-tech” way around this problem is to use dose-dependent radiation to interfere with or perhaps destroy the ability of the intima to heal itself. Several FDA sanctioned studies are now actively investigating whether intra-arterial radiation (as pellets or “seeds”) improves the success rate of coronary by-pass operations and angioplasty. From the increasing level of mass desensitization (television news reports) it can be surmised that this procedure will soon be sanctioned by the FDA.
The radiotherapy system consists of a source wire, a source delivery unit and a centering catheter. The source wire is flexible and incorporates a radioactive isotope into its tip. The delivery unit stores the source wire when it is not in use and automatically advances and retracts it during a procedure. The source wire is advanced through the centering catheter, which is placed across the area to be treated. Has modern medicine lost its collective mind? According to John Gofman, medical radiation causes the lesions in the first place. Then they want to add more radiation to take away the natural ability to heal! Medicine has metamorphed into the antithesis of healing. It is incomprehensible that any doctor would willingly interfere with the natural healing process simply to make their lucrative surgeries more attractive. High-dose intra-arterial radiation treatments are absurd, inhumane, cruel, and nullify any chance for a nutriton-based therapy to succeed. Cardiologists are willing to subject heart patients to a treatment that is more cruel and unusual than punishment our laws permit for criminals. The proposed use of “high-dose” radiation particles inside arterises to stop the regrowth of plaque, caused by open-heart surgery and angioplasty/stent procedures, is at best unethical, and at worst criminal. To the extent intra-arterial radiation treatments interfere with the ability of the artery to heal normally, these radiation treatments make success from nutritional approaches impossible. Radiation would interfere with any non-invasibe therapy that relies on healing. Early MDs/scientists recognized that plaque formation is uniform and localized.
Most surgically removed plaque is within inches of the human heart where the blood vessels are stretched and bent, implicating high blood pressures and mechanical stress caused by the heart beat. It is now generally accepted that atherosclerotic plaques deposit in response to injury. The 1985 Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of the lysine binding sites. The Unified Theory, relying on the Nobel Prize, and earlier work, blames mechanical stress fractures (caused by high blood pressures, stretching and bending, etc.) for the lesion. It is unlikely that the primary cause of the lesions that lead to heart disease are caused by “poisons” circulating in the blood, because plaques are not randomly distributed ( A typical heart bypass uses plaque-free veins from the leg.).
According to theory, the root cause of atherosclerotic plaque deposits is a vitamin C deficiency. This deficiency limits our ability to produce the structural super-protein collagen. Heart disease is unknown in most animal species. Humans are less resistant to damage from the heart beat’s mechanical stress than animals because they lack vitamin C (not ascorbic acid) deficiency, a deficiency impossible in most animals! Humans must supplement 100 times the RDA of vitamin C to get an equivalent of what animals generally make in their livers or kidneys.
The correct terminology for cardiovascular disease is either “chronic” scurvey or “sub-clinical” scurvey. Medicine has been deliberately steered astray about vitamin C since the 1940s. Elevated cholesterol, elevated homocysteine, and oxidized cholesterol then, are effects, not the cause of CVD. Sugar intake is more closely correlated to cardiovascular disease than cholesterol intake. Pauling and Rath claim that specific non-toxic substances, called Lp(a) binding inhibitors, taken orally will prevent and even dissolve existing atherosclerotic plaque build-ups. The three primary Lp(a) binding inhibitor substances are vitamin C, lysine and proline. They increase blood concentrations of important substances that will strengthen and heal blood vessels, lower Lp(a) blood levels, and keep Lp(a) levels low, and inhibit the binding of Lp(a) molecules to the walls of blood vessels. Lysine and proline work to unbind Lp(a) from the arterial wall. Unlike ordinary drugs, there are no health risks. There is an awesome elegance that these binding inhibitors are completely non-toxic, yet they have been shown to dissolve plaqe in vitro. They are also the basic building blocks of collagen. The theory places poor collagen production at the root of the heart disease problem. Since plaque formation is a surrogate healing process, doctors should not be surprised that plaque reoccurs after invasive surgery.
Mainstream medical science has known since 1989 that only Lp(a) (not LDL cholesterol) binds to form atherosclerotic plaques. Lp(a) is an evolutionary surrogate for low vitamin C in humans. Not only will high dose intra-arterial radiation interfere with the healing of chronic scurvy, the great risk nuclear cardiologists subject these patients to is completely unnecessary. Patients who are subjected to radiation will not be able to heal normally, and they will likely suffer premature death. If the patients live, how can anyone know the dangerous side effects that radiation may itself cause. Since radiation is being widely studied, it is evident that cardiovascular doctors, as a group, are entirely ignorant of the nutritional approach or the Linus Pauling unified theory. Why are some of the most educated individuals in our society the most ignorant about the condition they are supposed to treat on a daily basis?
No profit-oriented drug company will inform cardiologists about the unified theory or dietary approach. So how does the average nuclear cardiologist learn about it? They don’t! No cardiologist or heart surgeon has ever been informed or heard about vitamin B, vitamin E, essential fatty acids, antioxidants, vitamin C and lysine from an official source or respected authority. They do not realize that they can completely cure their patients in less than six months, simply, safely, and with the good effects becoming pronounced after as little as two weeks. Ignorance perpetuates itself. Cardiologists cannot believe this could be true and that they could not know. But this information was first made available to the world in the 1940s, by Linus Pauling.
Cardiologists routinely tell their patients that there is no value in nutritional therapy. The doctors who use radiation to stop re-stenosis do not really understand the disease they are charged to treat. If they do understand, then they are acting in a criminal manner. The conclusion is, therefore, that the true nature of heart disease is unknown to cardiologists who should otherwise know that re-stenosis is completely preventable and that high-dose radiation procedures actually cause lesions and are completely unnecessary. Cardiologists are blinded, either by economic and/or political considerations. That lack of adequate nutrition is the leading risk factor in heart disease is easily proven, shown by countless studies, but is completely ignored by orthodox cardiology. Damaged arteries must heal. When the surgeon cuts (by-pass operation) or damages the arteries (angioplasty) how can they be surprised that the scab (atherosclerotic plaque) reforms. Any therapy that unnaturally interferes with this healing process (radiation) poses such a great risk to the overall health of the patient that there can be no ethical basis for it whatsoever. Cardiologists believe that their profession is based on strict science and they are taught that there is no value in nutritional therapies.
If nutrition is wrong, no harm is done, if conventional cardiology treatment is wrong, millions have died needlessly. Simply removing plaque (angioplasty) without restoring the vessel to health is like tearing a scab off a wound. Intra-arterial radiation only compounds this basic theoretical problem. One should not remove the scab until after the tissue underneath has started healing. With exposure to radiation, it can’t. The American Heart Association estimates that the cost of heart disease was 326 billion dollars in the year 2000. This includes time lost at work, etc. If medicine had acted on the nutritional results back in 1994 or 1995, more than a million lives and trillions of dollars would have been saved. This makes ignoring nutrition the most costly suppression ever perpetrated by the medico-pharmaceutical complex on humankind. Now that knowledge of the nutritional cure is rapidly spreading, thanks to the Internet, nuclear cardiologists may have found a clever way to preserve the cash cow: intra-arterial high dose radiation. Then they can keep patients perpetually ill. Only in this way can cardiologists guarantee a lucrative income stream that is in great danger of drying up–soon. If your doctor prescribes a therapy such as intra-arterial radiation that interferes with your ability to heal, then the nutritional approach, or any other complementary therapy that works by healing, will not work for you, and may never work. A doctor who advises it should be considered extremely ignorant, incompetent, or worse.
Otolaryngologist Dr. David Roberson has first-hand experience with medical errors. He remembers one near-miss in a patient about to receive a cochlear implant and says it typifies the kinds of mistakes he and his colleagues have turned up in a national survey.
"I looked at the CT scan carefully to determine if the cochlea would accept the implant," recalls Roberson, from the Department of Otolaryngology and Communication Disorders at Children's Hospital Boston. "I asked a colleague to look at it also, and he commented that the auditory nerves looked small. I then ordered an MRI which showed the patient had no auditory nerves on either side. I came close to performing surgery and putting a major device in a child's head when there was no possibility of benefit, since she had no auditory nerve. I didn't look carefully enough at the entire scan."
Roberson and colleagues sent a brief, anonymous survey to 2,500 members of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, and received 466 responses (19 percent). Of these, 210 physicians -- 45 percent -- reported that a medical error had occurred in their practice in the past six months. Errors occurred in all phases of patient care; 78 (37 percent) caused major injury or harm, and 9 (4 percent) were fatal. Both adults and children were affected.
Errors were carefully classified. The largest category, accounting for 19 percent, was technical errors during procedures, and 56 percent of these caused major injury or harm. Next were medication errors (14 percent); these included dosage mistakes and giving medications to which the patient was allergic, or that were contraindicated. Testing errors (10 percent) included physician errors (ordering incorrect tests; not reviewing tests; not acting on the results) and lab errors (lost specimens; errors in labeling and interpretation of results). Surgical planning errors (scheduling mistakes; failing to ensure that all preoperative studies were complete; and judgment errors, such as undertaking surgery when it was risky) accounted for another 10 percent. Younger physicians were more likely than physicians over age 50 to report errors (approximately 60 versus 40 percent).
Other errors included:
* Equipment errors equipment not available or improperly assembled; equipment failure (9.4 percent)
* Errors in post-operative care (8.5 percent)
* Wrong site surgery wrong patient, wrong organ, or wrong side (6 percent);
* Drug errors during surgery (4 percent)
* Communication errors (4 percent)
Roberson and colleagues believe that the proportion of physicians encountering an error -- 45 percent - is an underestimate. They suggest that doctors may not be trained to recognize errors, and may tend to recall errors that have serious consequences but overlook minor ones. In one of two editorials accompanying the study, Dr. Lucian Leape of the Harvard School of Public Health concurs, "In the absence of a significant adverse event, most clinicians do not recognize (or admit) errors." Leape adds that the study provides a unique and useful classification scheme for medical errors. "Not only does this scheme make clinical sense, it would seem to have applicability to other surgical specialties," he writes. The study is the cover article in the August 2004 issue of the journal Laryngoscope. "The probability of an otolaryngologist erring on any individual decision is miniscule," the authors note. "However, because we all make millions of medical decisions, we will all make many errors during our careers… Most errors are made by good or outstanding providers."
The Journal of the American Medical Association recently reported that as many as 106,000 deaths occur annually in US hospitals due to adverse reactions to prescription drugs that are properly prescribed by physicians that use them as directed by the drug companies. Even worse, the National Council for Patient Information and Education reported that an additional 125,000 deaths occur annually due to adverse reactions to drugs that the physician never should have prescribed. In these deaths the doctor did not follow the instructions on proper administration of the drugs. For example, Glucophage, a diabetic oral hypoglycemic, should never be prescribed for patients with Kidney disease or Congestive Heart Failure because it can cause fatal lactic acidosis in these patients. A warning label is prominently placed on the medication container to warn of this potential misuse. However, JAMA reported that almost 1/4 of the patients who had been prescribed Glucophage had kidney damage or congestive heart failure or both.
The annual death toll from synthetic prescription drugs, both from the correctly prescribed and the incorrectly prescribed, amounts to about 231,000 deaths every year. To put this into perspective, this is the equivalent of a world trade center disaster every week for over a year and a half or the crash of two fully loaded 747 aircraft every day of the year. No information was reported on the number of outpatient and doctor's office deaths caused by these very same drugs when prescribed by these very same doctors. The reported figures alone, however, make drug deaths caused by physicians the third leading cause of death in the US. It is far ahead of accidents, drunk driving, homicides, airline accidents, as well as all other disease with the sole exceptions of cancer and heart disease.
Many of these drugs responsible for the death statistics cited are diabetic drugs. None of these drugs cure or even were intended to cure diabetes. During the time a patient is on the drugs his body is suffering great damage due to the uncontrolled progress of the disease. This is in addition to the risk and damage caused by the drug itself.
According to Dr. Mendelsohn, author of Confessions of a Medical Heretic, 2.4 million unnecessary operations are performed every year and they cost over 12,000 lives. When the records of six New York hospitals were examined it was found that 43% of the hysterectomies that were performed were medically unnecessary. No one should ever submit to any surgical procedure without first obtaining several unrelated medical opinions, at least not here in the United States. Women are particularly vulnerable to this type of victimization.
According to the World Health Report 2000 the United States ranks twelfth, that is second from the bottom, in their thirteen country survey of sixteen available health indicators. We are dead last for low birth weight and neonatal and infant mortality. We rank between ninth and twelfth for all life expectancy categories between one year and 40 years. Another study ranked the United States as fifteenth in the twenty-five industrialized countries studied.
Diabetes, hypoglycemia, is hyperinsulinemia are so widespread in the United States that it is estimated that over half the population exhibits one or more symptoms of these life destroying diseases. Symptoms of Adult onset diabetes are now being routinely noted in six year old children. Obesity and it's related endocrine dysfunction are commonly observed in teenagers. Heart failure, a symptom of advanced type II diabetes, remains in the top three killer diseases in the Westernized countries. Although the cause and cure for type II diabetes and related endocrine failure has been increasingly well understood in the scientific community for the last forty years, this disease is not being cured by todays orthodox treatment regimens. In order to find a cure it is necessary to seek alternative medical approaches to this disease.
When the government of any nation forgets its people and, instead, focuses on defending and promoting the interests of powerful corporations, you no longer have a Democracy. Instead, you have a Plutocracy, where the wealthy elite control the political process and use laws to further enrich themselves at the expense of the public.
It's an accurate description of what's happening in America today: The public is no longer represented by the Senate, the FDA, the USDA or the EPA. Instead, each of these governmental bodies (legislative for the Senate, executive for the other departments) is now operating in the interests of corporations. Campaign finance reform, of course, is impossible under such circumstances, since no corporate-controlled Senate will ever vote to cut itself off from corporate money. Thus, the only outcome of the situation is a further erosion of the integrity of U.S. legislative processes to the point where the public is impoverished, the nation is bankrupt, and the corporations run the government.
Big Business and Big Government are now merging to become a unified system of financial exploitation of the people. The corporations financially rape the people, and the government keeps it legal.
Senators of both major parties -- Democratic and Republican join together in the mass betrayal of U.S. consumers. While Republicans certainly have stronger ties to drug companies, when push comes to shove Democrats will sell out their constituents just the same. The pocketbook of no citizen is safe when Congress is in session, and any voter who thinks one political party or another is going to come to the rescue and actually protect the interests of consumers is hopelessly naive.
A doctor’s skills of observation, physical examination and deductive reasoning, which used to be considered his most essential diagnostic tools, have now been replaced by reliance on narrowly interpreted lab tests and lists of numerical diagnoses allowable by insurance plans. The health insurance industry has forced the entire practice of medicine to restrict itself to pre-approved numbered codes for both the diagnosis and the treatment of all health conditions. Drugs or surgery are usually the only therapies offered by modern medicine, even when they are inappropriate. So if an illness does not show up clearly on a lab test or fit a diagnostic code, and if there is no known surgical or drug treatment for the symptoms, then it is as though the problem is non-existent.
Medical doctors today are constricted by medical licensing boards, the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries, and their patients’ expectations of quick recovery. As a result of these influences and a certain bias in their training, they think and practice primarily pharmaceutical medicine, seeking to prescribe the appropriate drug for the condition. Because of the ever-present threat of a malpractice suit and the conservative influence of peer review boards, medical doctors have become much less willing and able to try something different to help their patients.
Malpractice is not decided just on the basis of the harm suffered by the patient, but on the consensus of the medical profession about what would be considered “proper” protocol in that particular situation. So, to protect themselves, most doctors have become much more orthodox in their practice of medicine. Their training no longer prepares them to explore beyond lab tests or routine signs and symptoms, nor do they often, if ever, consider truly alternative therapies. It has become unrewarding and down right dangerous to do any real thinking when it comes to diagnosis and treatment.
In addition to the fact that medical training is now dependent on huge pharmaceutical corporations for funding, modern medicine is currently in the stranglehold of insurance companies. Under our present medical system, most physicians’ incomes come primarily from insurance companies. Paperwork created by the insurance industry and licensing boards that is required of therapists, physicians, clinics and hospitals demands that each patient be given what is called an “ICD” (International Classification of Disease) code for their medical condition. This ICD code puts a name on your disease or condition. No one can fit in the cracks. You must have an ICD code to classify your illness.
Everyone is required to have an ICD. If there is no ICD, the financial medical wheel quickly comes to a halt for that patient and for the doctor treating them. Records are incomplete without these codes and bills cannot be submitted to insurance companies without them. Consequently, physicians must identify the patient’s diagnosis with an ICD code or the insurance companies will not pay them.
Patients also depend on the insurance companies to pay for whatever therapy they receive, but an insurance company will only pay for certain therapies that are approved as appropriate for each ICD code (diagnosis). If the doctor does not use an approved therapy for his diagnostic (ICD) code, there will be no payment. Without insurance coverage of the costs, most patients as well as most doctors are unwilling to proceed with any medical treatment. As a result many conditions rarely get treated, even if the physician knows it exists.
A large part of this medical disaster that the United States currently experiences is due to the way our medical community is organized. Basically it is not organized to heal and to cure disease; the medical community, particularly at its upper levels, is a commercial venture organized to make money for its practitioners. Although the record of the United States medical community in the cure of disease is deplorable, the same cannot be said for its ability to produce income and profit. For example, for the top fifteen pharmaceutical companies, including such names as Abbot, Wyeth, Hoffman-La Roche, Merck and others, the second quarter revenue for 2002 was reported as $63,520.6 million and the corresponding reported income was 11,731.8 million respectively. This is second only to the defense industry in the United States.
Most American families are aware of the rising cost of medical treatment in the United States. A simple visit to an emergency room now costs hundreds--even thousands--of dollars, while long-term care for the elderly can run as much as a new home. A new study, released in Washington on Dec. 10, 2002, called What's Behind the Rise? A Comprehensive Analysis of Health Care Costs was conducted by experts from the University of Southern California, the Lewin Group and HealthShare Technology. They used data from more than 3 million people nationwide. According to the study, inpatient hospital costs grew by 5.9% annually during the period 1998 to 2001, roughly twice the rate of inflation. "The overall rise in inpatient costs, due to its sheer size, contributed the largest amount to the rise in hospital spending--34 percent," the report said. Growing salaries for doctors and their staff and the cost of insu;rance account for a large portion of rising costs. "Hospital wages--including physician, nursing and the wages of other health care professionals--account for 20 percent of the ris in inpatient expenditures," noted researchers.
While the study found that new technology in hospitals accounts for 19 percent of the rise in costs, researchers also discovered that so-called hospital "under-utilization"--or not enough sick people requiring new technology--accounts for 15 percent of cost increases. According to the report, 18 percent of rising inpatient costs is related to hospital consolidation. Every 1 percent increase in market share due to consolidation leads to a 2 percent increase in inpatient expenditures. Also, researchers found that incomes in a given area, as measured by state per-capita disposable income, accounts for 10 percent of the rise in spending. This means that hospitals will charge what administrators feel the region can afford.
In 1997, the latest year for which there are figures, the earnings of physicians were reported as averaging around $200,000 per year. The lowest reporting specialty, rheumatology reported $158,500 and the highest, cardiovascular surgeon, reported $363,300. When examining the numbers, it was noted that the high salaries seemed to be concentrated in members of the AMA. Those belonging to less powerful trade unions did not fare nearly so well even though they did most of the actual patient care work. For example, the median staff salary of registered nurses was $35,256.
The Cardiac surgeon, for example, does nothing whatsoever to cure cardiac disease. Three to five percent of the heart surgery patients die on the operating table. Cardiac surgery provides no better three year survival rate than no treatment at all. A Harvard survival study of 200,000 patients revealed that the long term survival rate of patients subjected to surgery was no better than the survival rate of those that had no surgery. Of course, your cardiac surgeon will not tell you this when you need to make a decision on whether or not to elect cardiac surgery. Never in history has so many accumulated so much wealth for providing their customers or clients or patients with so little real benefit.
Many doctors of integrity are as much victims of the system as are their patients. Today's doctor is not free to treat disease as his conscience dictates. He is forced to administer approved protocols whether they are known to work or not. To deviate from these approved protocols invites law suits, peer criticism and censure from State medical licensing boards.
This sad state of affairs is directly traceable to the takeover of the American Medical Association by the Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations in the early part of the twentieth century. At the turn of the century the medical community was in a sad state of disrepair. There were no qualifications to become a doctor. If one wanted to be a doctor it was only necessary to hang out a shingle and start the practice of medicine. Medical schools were poorly financed, often taught contradictory medical philosophies and had little impact on the practice of medicine. In 1910 the American Medical Association, today's AMA, was on the verge of bankruptcy. Few doctors belonged to it and even fewer paid any attention to it. Quackery of all kinds was rampant. The market was flooded with fake cancer cures and 80 proof liver tonic.
It was in this environment that Rockefeller and Carnegie moved in and bought the AMA and then used it to take control of the entire United States medical establishment. In 1910, Henry Prichard president of the Carnegie foundation, bought control of the AMA for the sum of $10,000. He then financed the publication of the Flexner Report, as it was then called, to gain popular support for the changes that were to be made in the medical community. With public backing secured by the publication of the Flexner report, Carnegie and Rockefeller commenced a major upgrade in medical education by financing only those medical schools that taught what they wanted taught. Predictably, those schools that had the financing churned out the better doctors. In return for the financing, the schools were required to teach course material that was exclusively drug oriented. That is why today our doctors are so heavily biased toward synthetic drug therapy and know little or nothing about nutrition.
Dr. David Edsall, former dean of Harvard medical school, said "I was, for a period, a professor of therapeutics and pharmacology, [at Harvard] and I knew from experience that students were obliged then by me and by others to learn about an interminable number of drugs, many of which were valueless, many of them useless, some probably even harmful...." For a time, these changes actually improved the practice of medicine in the United States. Then, as the distorted medical curriculum began to churn out doctors whose only concern was prescribing synthetic drugs, things began to deteriorate into what we see today.
Today the average medical doctor receives 3 hours or less training on nutrition despite the fact that our bodies are constructed entirely of what we eat and drink. Today's doctor receives much of his ongoing education from detail men. The detail man is the drug company salesman whose job it is to teach the doctor how to use the latest drugs.
Even with all of this history the medical doctor retained a great deal of his autonomy through the 1930's and into the late 1940's. In 1949 another major change took place in the medical community that set the stage for the disaster we see today. It was in 1949 that the medical community reorganized itself into the competing medical specialty groups we see today. Prior to 1949 a doctor was a doctor; he dealt with all disease and injury. After 1949 this was not so. The reorganization established many of the specialties that we know today. It was then that the cardiac specialist, the endocrinologist, the hepatic and biliary specialist and many other professional specialty groups were formed. The symptoms of the then raging epidemic of type II diabetes were divided among the specialty groups so that each group had their own set of proprietary symptoms.
The story given out for the reorganization was that it would help to focus more attention on the then current diabetes epidemic. However, in practice it caused the entire medical community to treat their own proprietary symptom set and nobody focused on curing the disease anymore. This was the origin of the "treat the symptom" and "ignore the cause" philosophy that now dominates the entire medical community. This was the turning point event that led to the removal of the word "cure" from the medical vocabulary. Today, if you mention the "c" word around your doctor he will usually glaze over and pretend not to hear you. He only responds to the word "treatment."
Under the Rockefeller and Carnegie influence their pharmaceutical firms started to pour out the vast array of synthetic drugs that the doctors trained to their medical school standards now prescribed almost to the exclusion of any other remedies. Among the first drugs to be marketed this way were the oral hypoglycemic agents. They were deliberately designed to treat the symptom while not curing the disease.
Since the name of the medical game was money, a means had to be devised to provide the patient with money that could only be used to pay for approved medical treatment. Enter the insurance company concept. Today employees have, as an important part of their remuneration for their work, a health insurance policy. This health insurance policy does not pay for all health related needs; it only pays for those health related services that are approved. These, of course, are the synthetic drug therapies that are known to work poorly, if at all. In order to secure effective medical treatment from the alternative sector of the economy the patient must pay for it himself; insurance companies specifically exclude virtually all alternative treatment. One wonders why so many continue to pay for an insurance program that cannot, even in principle, be of any real benefit to them.
In the ordinary course of events, good medicine would eventually drive out bad medicine. As more and more people discover ways to maintain and improve their health, without drug therapy, they will simply abandon bad medicine and resort to alternative therapies. Indeed, this is happening. Also happening is a concerted government effort to discredit and declare unlawful those effective therapies that represent the greatest threat to orthodox medicine. In the last fifty years many effective cures have been developed for many of the major killer diseases that we have. In each instance the developer has been branded a quack, his business has been ruined and in some cases he has been sent to jail.
Even with outright governmental attacks on those that would promote effective therapies in America, the tide is turning. More and more Americans are waking up to the reality of our medical community. More and more they are finding it to be a fraud and they are turning to less conventional treatments and modalities. Informed Americans that require effective medical treatment for anything more serious than a head cold are turning away from orthodox drug quackery in droves. The medical community is trying hard to make it illegal to refuse their treatment. A major effort is currently underway (Codex) to severely restrict the availability of nutritional supplements to those that use them throughout the world. Our government is seriously considering mandatory vaccination programs.
Many believe that our Food and Drug Administration, FDA, represents the American people and that the FDA acts to insure that our food and drugs are safe and effective. Nothing could be further from the truth. The FDA acts entirely to restrain and manage competition between and among those that manufacture our food and drugs. They do this only for the purpose of minimizing competition in business. Rockefeller is famous for proclaiming the only sin is competition. Willy Ley, a former head of the FDA, said it best when he said "What the Food and Drug Administration does and what the public thinks that it does are a different as night and day."
Today in America the practice of medicine is not free. It is one of the most tightly controlled commercial enterprises in the world. That is why it produces such extraordinary income for it's favored and such misery, disease and death for its victims.
Given the growth of the medical monster that ate the United States, what can we who live here do to effectively manage our own health? Perhaps the single most important thing that we all must do is to recognize that our health is our most important possession. We have no choice but to accept total responsibility for our own health. To leave such an important consideration to someone who clearly has much to gain by lying to us just does not make sense. Typically, we buy our cars and houses with a great deal more wisdom than we bring to the doctor's office when we go there. The modern orthodox medical community treats symptoms; they do not cure disease. When you visit the doctor, it is perfectly in order for you to ask bluntly whether or not the treatment he wants to give you will cure the disease you have.
If you are currently under a doctors care and are dissatisfied with the results you are getting, do not just stop taking the prescribed medication. Get your doctor, or another doctor if yours will not cooperate, to help wean you off prescription drugs and to help you to devise a workable alternative therapy. Many of these synthetic drugs will produce serious side effects if they are abruptly discontinued. After accepting full responsibility for your own health, the second most important consideration is to do your homework and learn about the disease or disability that you have. Buy books, attend seminars, subscribe to newsletters, search the internet, and learn about what it takes to actually reverse the disease that afflicts you. Investigate alternative medical practitioners. Many Naturopaths, Chiropractors and Acupuncturists can be of great help in actually curing disease. Do not fall for the idea that only medical doctors are smart enough to understand these things.
Look for that unusual doctor that will risk really trying to help you; and, realize that s/he is taking a substantial risk when he does so. In other words, do the best you can to find something better for yourself than what your doctor offers. Help each other. If you discover something important, don't be afraid to share the information. Be vocal when government organizations attempt to restrict or deny your access to natural nutritional supplements. If you are fortunate to find a doctor with this kind of integrity, understand the importance of what you have found and give him all of the support that you can give. There is a medical doctor in California that refused to compromise his integrity in his practice of medicine. He ended up in jail, put there by his fellow doctors. His patients got together, got him out of jail and had a special bill passed in the State legislature to protect his practice of medicine. Today he still runs a flourishing practice where he ministers to patients from all over this country. He is actually curing disease not just treating it.
Third, after accepting responsibility for your own health and becoming informed, recognize that medicine is a business. Your doctor is a paid consultant just like your electrician or plumber and he is listed in the same yellow pages. You have every right to get the information for which you are paying. When your doctor retreats into arrogance and refuses to provide direct answers to direct questions, consider getting another doctor. There really are many safe and effective therapies that go far beyond drugs. However, we must demand them on the firing line, in the doctor's office, when we need them.
Most Americans do not realize this, but we are on the verge of a major doctor shortage in the United States. All over America, good doctors are going broke. The way that our health care system is currently set up, they simply cannot make it. These days a lot of politicians are warning us about the dangers of "socialized medicine", but the truth is that we already have it. About half of all health care dollars in the United States are now spent by the federal government, and a lot of health insurance companies base reimbursements on what the federal government does. In addition, there are a whole host of parasites that have gotten between the doctor and the patient these days. Everyone wants a piece of the health care pie. Health insurance companies, pharmaceutical giants, lawyers, health care "administrators" and government bureaucrats all make a sweet living off of the doctor/patient relationship. It really is sickening. And now Obamacare is going to make things much, much worse. As you will read about later in this article, a stunning percentage of doctors say that they plan to leave the medical profession because of Obamacare. What this means is that we are headed for a chronic doctor shortage and there is a good chance that there will be no doctor for you when you really need one in the years ahead.
Today, approximately 40 percent of all doctors in the United States are 55 years of age or older. Large numbers of them are getting ready to retire.
Even before Obamacare was passed, we were already facing a massive shortage of doctors in the coming years. The American Association of Medical Colleges has projected that we will experience a shortage of more than 150,000 doctors over the next 15 years.
Unfortunately, the passage of Obamacare is going to make this crisis even worse. A whole host of surveys have shown that a massive number of doctors in America are headed for the exits because of the new health care law....
*According to a Merritt Hawkins survey of 2,379 doctors for the Physicians Foundation that was conducted in August 2010, 40 percent of all U.S. doctors plan to "retire, seek a nonclinical job in health care, or seek a job or business unrelated to health care" at some point over the next three years.
*A shocking IBD/TPP Poll taken in 2010 found that 45 percent of all U.S. doctors are considering leaving the medical profession or retiring early as a result of Obamacare.
At the moment, there are approximately 960,000 doctors in the United States.
So what is going to happen if a couple hundred thousand of them suddenly leave the medical profession?
Already we were in desperate need of a lot more doctors. The following comes from an article in the Wall Street Journal....
Health-care reform will add an estimated 32 million people to the ranks of the insured, driving them to seek medical attention that in the past they may have avoided due to expense. The aging population will also create much greater demand. The number of seniors who need more medical care is expected to soar to 72 million by 2020—nearly double today's number.
So what is going to happen if the number of doctors starts declining rapidly?
Most Americans think of doctors as being "wealthy", but that is not the reality of what is going on out there these days as a recent CNN article explained....
Doctors in America are harboring an embarrassing secret: Many of them are going broke.
This quiet reality, which is spreading nationwide, is claiming a wide range of casualties, including family physicians, cardiologists and oncologists.
Americans spend more on health care than anyone else in the world and yet thousands upon thousands of doctors are going broke.
How can that be?
Well, one huge contributing factor is the mismanagement of the federal government.
The following comes from an article in the New York Post....
Existing government programs already reimburse physicians at rates that are often less than the actual cost of treating a patient. Estimates suggest that on average physicians are reimbursed at roughly 78% of costs under Medicare, and just 70% of costs under Medicaid. Physicians must either make up for this shortfall by shifting costs to those patients with insurance — meaning those of us with insurance pay more — or treat patients at a loss.
So guess who has to make up the difference?
You and I.
When we go to see the doctor we get smacked with a huge bill in order to make up for the Medicare and Medicaid patients.
Things have gotten so bad that a lot of doctors won't even see Medicare and Medicaid patients anymore.
Just check out what some researchers found when they called around to doctors in Illinois back in 2010. The following comes from an article in the New York Times....
The study used a “secret shopper” technique in which researchers posed as the parent of a sick or injured child and called 273 specialty practices in Cook County, Ill., to schedule appointments. The callers, working from January to May 2010, described problems that were urgent but not emergencies, like diabetes, seizures, uncontrolled asthma, a broken bone or severe depression. If they were asked, they said that primary care doctors or emergency departments had referred them.
Sixty-six percent of those who mentioned Medicaid-CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program) were denied appointments, compared with 11 percent who said they had private insurance, according to an article being published Thursday in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Today, one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid. Without Medicaid, millions of children would not receive health care.
But now large numbers of doctors are rejecting patients on Medicaid because they simply cannot afford to treat them.
And now as Obamacare is fully implemented over the next few years it is going to make our health care mess a whole lot worse.
Obamacare is going to burden our doctors with a gigantic mountain of new regulations and red tape. It is going to become incredibly difficult to make a living as a doctor and the federal government is going to be pretty much running the entire health care system.
Did you know that Obamacare is so oppressive that it is even causing the cancellation of new hospitals?
According to the executive director of Physician Hospitals of America, Obamacare has already forced the cancellation of at least 60 doctor-owned hospitals that were scheduled to open.
In addition, as Obamacare is fully rolled out the wait to see a doctor is likely to get much longer. If you urgently need to see a doctor you may simply be out of luck.
If you doubt this, just check out what happened in Massachusetts. As a result of Romneycare, the average wait to see a doctor in Massachusetts is now much, much longer....
In fact, we have already seen the start of this process in Massachusetts, where Mitt Romney’s health care reforms were nearly identical to President Obama’s. Romney’s reforms increased the demand for health care but did nothing to expand the supply of physicians. In fact, by cracking down on insurance premiums, Massachusetts pushed insurers to reduce their payments to providers, making it less worthwhile for doctors to expand their practices. As a result, the average wait to get an appointment with a doctor grew from 33 days to over 55 days.
Is that the kind of health care system that you want?
The more doctors that leave the system, the worse that things are going to get.
We need a system where doctors can make a living. It is just as simple as that.
The following is one example of a doctor that is going broke from a recent CNN article....
Beau Donegan, senior executive with a hospital cancer center in Newport Beach, Calif., is well aware of physicians' financial woes.
"Many are too proud to admit that they are on the verge of bankruptcy," she said. "These physicians see no way out of the downward spiral of reimbursement, escalating costs of treating patients and insurance companies deciding when and how much they will pay them."
Donegan knows an oncologist "with a stellar reputation in the community" who hasn't taken a salary from his private practice in over a year. He owes drug companies $1.6 million, which he wasn't reimbursed for.
The following is another example from that same article....
Dr. Neil Barth is that oncologist. He has been in the top 10% of oncologists in his region, according to U.S. News Top Doctors' ranking. Still, he is contemplating personal bankruptcy.
That move could shutter his 31-year-old clinical practice and force 6,000 cancer patients to look for a new doctor.
Are you starting to get the picture?
There are already not enough doctors, and the number of doctors is going to continue to decline unless something is done.
We need to fundamentally restructure the way that health care is done in the United States. What we are doing now is not working, and Obamacare is going to make things much worse.
Today, the average medical school student graduates with over $295,000 of student loan debt.
So if doctors can't make any money, then where is the incentive to go into so much debt?
Something has gone very wrong.
It isn't as if we are not spending enough money on health care. Just consider the following stats....
-What the United States spent on health care in 2009 was greater than the entire GDP of Great Britain.
-According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, health care costs accounted for just 9.5% of all personal consumption back in 1980. Today they account for approximately 16.3%.
-Over the past decade, health insurance premiums have risen three times faster than wages have in the United States.
-According to a report released in 2010, Americans spend approximately twice as much as residents of other developed countries do on health care.
So we are definitely spending more than enough money on health care.
So where is it all going?
Well, it is going to the parasites....
-According to a report by Health Care for America Now, America's five biggest for-profit health insurance companies ended 2009 with a combined profit of $12.2 billion.
-The chairman of Aetna, the third largest health insurance company in the United States, brought in a staggering $68.7 million during 2010. Ron Williams exercised stock options that were worth approximately $50.3 million and he raked in an additional $18.4 million in wages and other forms of compensation. The funny thing is that he left the company and didn't even work the whole year.
-There were more than two dozen pharmaceutical companies that made over a billion dollars in profits each during 2008.
-According to the CDC, the percentage of Americans that say that they have taken a prescription drug within the last month has risen to almost 50 percent.
-Lawyers are certainly doing their part to contribute to soaring health care costs. According to one recent study, the medical liability system in the United States added approximately $55.6 billion to the cost of health care in 2008.
Are you starting to understand?
This gigantic mess is causing an increasing number of Americans to seek medical care outside of the country. According to numbers released by Deloitte Consulting, a whopping 875,000 Americans were "medical tourists" in 2010.
Our health care system is irretrievably broken. The federal government has messed it up beyond all recognition and it is not going to get better any time soon.