# Time for a paradigm shift



## d0ug (Mar 2, 2014)

At one time all science agreed that the sun rotated around the earth and anyone that said no was crazy. Then a paradigm shift happened 
  At one time all science agreed that the world was flat anyone disagreed was crazy. Then a paradigm happen 
  Now they all kneel at the alter of medicine science and when they are proven wrong they are consider crazy.
   Now the medical system can not cure heart burn they manage the symptoms with the blue pill.
  They can not cure arthritis but give you a metallic part.
  They can not cure diabetes but they can take your money for your whole life.
  They can not cure obesity but they can staple your stomach.
  They can do nothing for muscular dystrophy but give you drugs to control symptoms and wheel chairs.
  All these ailments have been handled easily by alternative medicine.

  USA has the most advanced medical science in the world and the sickest people in the world. US spend more money than the all other industrial countries put together.
  How good was all this science if they can’t help anyone?
  In the future when we have naturopath doctors and alternative healing given an equal footing with equal rights. There will be a paradigm shift.

   We will look back and call this medical madness and say it was barbaric.


----------



## That Guy (Mar 2, 2014)

The medical/industrial complex has turned it into a money grubbing grab fest.


----------



## nan (Mar 2, 2014)

Natural cure for obesity, is to eat a diet that suits your body type, and not rubbish take aways, and exercise at least 30 minutes a day eg walking.

Sure as anything, if you take one pill, that will cause something else for you to have to take another pill for.
I have never seen a chemist /drugstore go out of business.

We will look back and call this medical madness and say it was barbaric.  I do hope so D0ug


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 2, 2014)

... and Di, you believe that our modern shamans with their magic boxes and their magic pills are any better? You don't think those are actually prolonging our lives, do you? 

It's the easier lifestyles we live, the modern conveniences, that account for the lion's share of our new-found longevity. Tell me that the generation-by-generation life extension is due exclusively to modern medicine and I'll laugh.

Yes, the old diseases have been wiped out or controlled due to advances in medicine, and that's a good thing. But this paradigm of making you suffer and losing your dignity just to live another year or so? No, that's not good. I would rather live a year or two less and keep my dignity than to become a lab rat. 

The pendulum has swung too far. Our modern medical shamans have taken control of our lives with their pills and their machines. The sheep go willingly, brainwashed by commercials and by those who know nothing. It's a self-perpetuating machine, fueled by our mistaken conceptions that we are entitled to live forever. We become Frankenstein monsters because we trust the wrong people.


----------



## Happyflowerlady (Mar 2, 2014)

There are many things that doctors can do for us that do save lives, and allow people to live longer. Advances in medicine, such as antibiotics, cleanliness in operations, and new methods of examinations to determine the cause of an illness or injury, have been invaluable to our lifespan.
However, many of the medical treatments today are designed to help people live with their illness, rather than to actually cure the disease. 
Most doctors are not well trained in nutrition, and in any case, will usually prefer to prescribe medication, rather than a natural healing procedure, or nutritional food.

When doctors have done all they can to help us get well, and are only offering pain medication to alleviate suffering, and nothing to help us actually get well, then I believe that looking into alternative methods that have helped other people recover from the same type of ailment, is an intelligent thing to do. Our health is ultimately up to us to maintain, or to not maintain.

As far as people not living long enough to get old, in earlier times; that is true enough, but many people who did not live such dangerous lives, did live longer. 
Take for example, the Hunza people of the high Himalayan mountains. They have been long known for their health and longevity , as well as their very basic diet and lifestyle.

http://undergroundhealthreporter.com/hunza-diet-health-weight-loss#axzz2urlo71C7


----------



## d0ug (Mar 3, 2014)

Diwundrin said:


> The problem I have with with dismissing medical science in favour returning to 'natural remedies' is the difference in life expectancy rates.   Back when humanity was devoid of the burden of doctors and pharmeceuticals they were old at 30 and usually buried at 40.
> They didn't get old enough to die of what sees we oldies off these days.  If they had bad hearts they dropped on a hunt and were written out of the gene pool.
> Women died in childbirth and kept churning them out until one did kill them or they became anaemic or they just plain wore out, or got tossed out for a younger mate.  They didn't last long enough to reach menopause so there weren't any natural remedies for that.  Those who survived that long were burned as witches when they got 'possessed' by hot flushes and bad tempers.  Men died when they got too slow to dodge a charging Muskox or else turned into Shamans dispensing bullsh*t to the gullible around the campfire for scraps.
> 
> ...



The longest living people live in the blue zones around the world and they have no doctors. Living to be 100 is normal.


----------



## d0ug (Mar 3, 2014)

Your best friend when you have cancer is your immune system. Radiation and chemotherapy destroys the immune system and causes cancer. The medical system have been given trillions of dollars to find a cure for cancer and failed. They did not give the alternative medical science one cent to find a cure. The only doctors that showed any sign of success in helping with cancer got chased out of the country, thrown in jail, or disgraced by the medical system. The PDR has all the drugs listed and if you remove the antibiotics all other drugs only manage symptoms and not cure.


----------



## rt3 (Mar 3, 2014)

there isn't a perfect world cure due to medicine because there isn't ENOUGH money in it, not because of the money being made in it. compared to the defense industry, automobiles, etc pharmaceuticals doesn't account for much. if you include the entire medical industry (services etc.) you are using statistics incorrectly. whether holistic, natural, folklore, etc. works is beside the point. the very fact that people are paying more attention, learning more and asking questions is a BIG plus. having one answer over a large population is unrealistic. one thing for one person may not be good for another----- antidotal remedies does not equal data


----------



## rt3 (Mar 3, 2014)

there will never be an across the board equality in medical treatment, as long as someone has more and can afford they will buy better. the health food industry has brought many things to the daily affordable level of regular people. when tryptophan was first investigated as a sleep aid, and serotonin precursor, it was outrageously expensive. its next metabolite usable product 5-HTP is cheap and easy to get today solely because someone thought they could make some money.
The PDR is simply a compilation of the manufacturers label inserts and has no value clinically, WebMD is even better than the PDR, most therapeutic stuff is taken from Facts and Comparisons . and clinical specialty books if books are used at in the initial patient work up. 
in most cases of cancer the immune system IS the cause of death, not the cancer.  all disease states are immunological, a certain group of these produce cells at a rate that doesn't allow normal metabolism, that group of disease is called cancer


----------



## RCynic (Mar 10, 2014)

My wife is just about to start chemotherapy for breast cancer. I wouldn't dream of her going anywhere else than the best oncology center. I also worked in research labs for 12 years, including 4 years at the National Cancer Institute's Mammary Gland Carcinogenesis Program.

Every scientist in every discipline dreams about being the one who can walk home with a Nobel prize. If there was a cure for cancer, it would be shouted from the rooftops. The thing about science is that it does not have, and should rightfully never claim to have, the ultimate truth about anything. What it claims is to have a theory about how something works and that theory holds until it can be falsified. Hence the reason that things like religion and other superstitions are not studied by science in any meaningful way, because many such claims are not falsifiable.

The other thing to realize is that cancer is not a single disease. Tumor cells reflect their tissue of origin across a spectrum of differentiating characteristics. Cells from one tissue will react differently than cells from another tissue. Poorly differentiated cells are, in general, more difficult to treat with anything because they have deviated so far from the tissue of origin that they have few recognizable characteristics of that tissue. Therefore, drugs etc. that might have been effective in killing for example a pigmented epithelial cell, become largely ineffective because the therapies are targeted against a cell of a particular tissue type and that cell no longer resembles any tissue type at all.

We've only been at this for about 100 years, only a few decades have the advances in molecular biology been available. It isn't going to happen at once. Our life spans are slowly increasing. A century ago, very few people died of cancer...they died of something else first.

None of us are doing to live forever and cancer, being intimately tied to our mechanisms of cellular growth and repair by stem cell populations throughout the body, becomes more likely as we live longer, because there is increasing chance that some progenitor cell is going to make a mistake and forget when to quit dividing.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 10, 2014)

... and having gone through those therapies for months and weakened the body, and then and only then turning to holistics, is it any wonder that they get bad press? 

Going into a modality of treatment as a second-best choice will _always_ reduce the efficiency of that modality.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 10, 2014)

Interesting ...

Well, I suppose we go with what we know (and trust) the most. In my own experience I've known mainly horror stories from allopathic methods.


----------



## RCynic (Mar 10, 2014)

Yeah, I was just reading about Steve Jobs, how he delayed his treatment by several months while he tried various holistic remedies, to no avail. If anyone could afford top notch treatment, he could. He finally went for conventional treatment but it was pretty much too late. The story mentioned him talking with a peer, towards the end, who was also diagnosed with cancer and his advice to him was to get to the best available conventional medical specialist as soon as possible. Same story with Steve McQueen if I remember correctly. Similar story with my uncle also but he had already been told by oncologists that his case was not treatable. He was a boiler maker in the Navy and had asbestos induced mesothelioma in his lungs. That was a long time ago...maybe it would have been treatable these days.


----------



## Ina (Mar 10, 2014)

If it weren't for medicine, I more than likely would have died over thirty years ago. At 19 I had abdominal cancer, and was given radiation. At 26 they told me it was back, and they gave me a hysterectomy, and chemotherapy. They then told me if I made it another 5 years to cross my fingers and.... I'm still here, so I too listen to the Dr.'s, althought I admit to a phobia of Dr.s.


----------



## RCynic (Mar 10, 2014)

Ina said:


> If it weren't for medicine, I more than likely would have died over thirty years ago. At 19 I had abdominal cancer, and was given radiation. At 26 they told me it was back, and they gave me a hysterectomy, and chemotherapy. They then told me if I made it another 5 years to cross my fingers and.... I'm still here, so I too listen to the Dr.'s, althought I admit to a phobia of Dr.s.



Wow, good for you! I just read your story to my wife. I'm trying to keep her in a fighting mood.


----------



## Ina (Mar 10, 2014)

RC, Remind your wife that cancer medical treatments have come 1000's of miles since I had to fight that battle. I'll think of her, and send out all the blessing and prayers I can. But she must think into the future with a positive attitude.


----------



## Happyflowerlady (Mar 10, 2014)

I think that , like most things, this has to be a personal decision; and each person has to do what they feel will give them the best chance of survival. Cancer has become epidemic, and regardless of treatment, many people are dying from it; so there are good and bad stories from about any kind of treatment.
Regardless of what treatment a person decides to use, I think that you can always help your body by giving it healthy foods, and especially the ones that are known to be anti-cancer, like pinceapple,grapes, cabbage, and many others.  
Eating those cancer-fighting foods might be our best protection from getting cancer, as well. 

My son's fiancee died from the chemotherapy, not the cancer; it weakened her body too much. She refused to eat healthy foods, her doctor told her that eating ice cream was as good for her as the yogurt, or cottage cheese would be; so she existed on things she liked, like ice cream and potato chips. Even with healthy food, she might not have made it; but at least she would have had a better chance, in my opinion.


----------



## nan (Mar 10, 2014)

DDIL has just finished her Chemo and radiation treatment for bowel cancer and is now waiting to have an operation,but cannot have it until she has gained weight which she lost through the treatment, also she has now got Hypothyroidism caused by the chemo and it is hampering her being able to gain weight.
After seeing her suffer the way she is at the moment, I will not have chemo or radiation therapy if I get cancer,I will be trying holistic first there are many holistic therapies and diets out there that have helped many people.
I myself have survived childhood cancer through holistic and diet methods, and this was when there was no chemo or radiation treatments in Australia.


----------



## d0ug (Mar 10, 2014)

RCynic said:


> Yeah, I was just reading about Steve Jobs, how he delayed his treatment by several months while he tried various holistic remedies, to no avail. If anyone could afford top notch treatment, he could. He finally went for conventional treatment but it was pretty much too late. The story mentioned him talking with a peer, towards the end, who was also diagnosed with cancer and his advice to him was to get to the best available conventional medical specialist as soon as possible. Same story with Steve McQueen if I remember correctly. Similar story with my uncle also but he had already been told by oncologists that his case was not treatable. He was a boiler maker in the Navy and had asbestos induced mesothelioma in his lungs. That was a long time ago...maybe it would have been treatable these days.



The story of Steve McQueen is that he went for alternative treatment after orthodox failed and when he was feeling better they convinced him to have surgery which killed him, his wife wrote a letter of thanks to the alternative doctors for all they did and believed if he had not gone back to the orthodox doctors he would still be alive.


----------



## d0ug (Mar 10, 2014)

I know personally people who went the alternative route and are alive today and did not suffer during the treatment. Others who went the allopathic route and suffered and the cancer returned. These people were good friends of mine. I though the premise of medicine I shell do no harm but this dose not applies in cancer. There has been lots of cures and the people have been chased out of the country or devastated by the orthodox medicine.  One name comes to mind is Dr. Raymond Rife who developed a treatment and proved it by curing patience sent to him by the AMA they made a banquet in his honor  then tried they best to destroy him. That is only one of many.


----------



## RCynic (Mar 10, 2014)

d0ug said:


> The story of Steve McQueen is that he went for alternative treatment after orthodox failed and when he was feeling better they convinced him to have surgery which killed him his wife wrote a letter of thanks to the alternative doctors for all they did and believed if he had not gone back to the orthodox doctors he would still be alive.



Hmmm, I couldn't remember the story exactly so looked it up. Looks to me like we were both off on what actually happened.

"McQueen developed a persistent cough in 1978. He gave up cigarettes and underwent antibiotic treatments without improvement. Shortness of breath grew more pronounced and on December 22, 1979, after filming _The Hunter,_ a biopsy revealed pleural mesothelioma,[SUP][63][/SUP] a cancer associated with asbestos exposure for which there is no known cure. The asbestos was thought to have been in the protective suits worn in his race car driving days, but in fact the auto racing suits McQueen wore were made of Nomex, a DuPont fire-resistant aramid fiber that contains no asbestos. By February 1980, there was evidence of widespread metastasis. While he tried to keep the condition a secret, the _National Enquirer_ disclosed that he had "terminal cancer" on March 11, 1980. In July, McQueen traveled to Rosarito Beach, Mexico for unconventional treatment after US doctors told him they could do nothing to prolong his life.[SUP][64][/SUP]Controversy arose over McQueen's Mexican trip, because McQueen sought a non-traditional cancer treatment called the Gerson Therapy that used coffee enemas, frequent washing with shampoos, daily injections of fluid containing live cells from cows and sheep,massage and laetrile, a supposedly "natural" anti-cancer drug available in Mexico, but not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. McQueen paid for these unconventional medical treatments by himself in cash payments which was said to have cost an upwards of $40,000 per month during his three-month stay in Mexico. McQueen was treated by William Donald Kelley, whose only medical license had been (until revoked in 1976) for orthodontics.[SUP][65][/SUP] Kelley's methods created a sensation in the traditional and tabloid press when it was known that McQueen was a patient.[SUP][66][/SUP][SUP][67][/SUP] McQueen returned to the US in early October. Despite metastasis of the cancer through McQueen's body, Kelley publicly announced that McQueen would be completely cured and return to normal life. McQueen's condition soon worsened and "huge" tumors developed in his abdomen.[SUP][65][/SUP] In late October 1980, McQueen flew to Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, Mexico to have an abdominal tumor on his liver (weighing around five pounds) removed, despite warnings from his US doctors that the tumor was inoperable and his heart could not withstand the surgery.[SUP][65][/SUP][SUP][68][/SUP] McQueen checked into a Juarez clinic under the assumed name of "Sam Shepard" where the doctors and staff at the small, low-income clinic were unaware of his actual identity. On November 7, 1980, Steve McQueen died at the age of 50 at the Juárez clinic following the surgical operation to remove or reduce several metastatic tumors in his neck and abdomen.[SUP][68][/SUP] He had in fact died of cardiac arrest at 3:45 am in his hospital bed more than 12 hours after the surgery to remove the tumors. An article in the El Paso _Times_ noted that before his death he awoke in his hospital bed and asked the nurse for some ice water and then died."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_McQueen


----------



## RCynic (Mar 10, 2014)

d0ug said:


> I know personally people who went the alternative route and are alive today and did not suffer during the treatment. Others who went the allopathic route and suffered and the cancer returned. These people were good friends of mine. I though the premise of medicine I shell do no harm but this dose not applies in cancer. There has been lots of cures and the people have been chased out of the country or devastated by the orthodox medicine.  One name comes to mind is Dr. Raymond Rife who developed a treatment and proved it by curing patience sent to him by the AMA they made a banquet in his honor  then tried they best to destroy him. That is only one of many



The world is full of anecdotes, and if something is not repeatably verified by multiple other labs, then it is just that, anecdotal. Biology is always messy like that. It's not like claims for perpetual motion machines which can be tested and their operation confirmed or not. Biology is almost never 100% anything, because it's basis is in equilibrium reactions, feedback mechanisms, so the occasional wild result is not unusual. But if it is not reproducible, if it shows no statistical benefit beyond chance, then it gets swept under the rug with the other litter. I had never heard of Rife but in looking him up in Wikipedia, which is not a biased medical source, he sounds like a quack. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Royal_Rife&oldid=589779158

"(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
​*Royal Raymond Rife* (May 16, 1888 – August 5, 1971) was an American inventor and early exponent of high-magnification time-lapse cine-micrography.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP] In the 1930s, he claimed that by using a specially designed optical microscope, he could observe microbes which were too small to visualize with previously existing technology.[SUP][3][/SUP] Rife also reported that a 'beam ray' device of his invention could weaken or destroy the pathogens by energetically exciting destructive resonances in their constituent chemicals.[SUP][4]
[/SUP]
Rife's claims could not be independently replicated,[SUP][5][/SUP] and were ultimately discredited by the medical profession in the 1950s. Rife blamed the scientific rejection of his claims on aconspiracy involving the American Medical Association (AMA), the Department of Public Health, and other elements of "organized medicine", which had "brainwashed" potential supporters of his devices.[SUP][6]
[/SUP]
Interest in Rife's claims was revived in some alternative medical circles by the 1987 book _The Cancer Cure That Worked_, which claimed that Rife had succeeded in curing cancer, but that his work was suppressed by a powerful conspiracy headed by the AMA.[SUP][5][/SUP] After this book's publication, a variety of devices bearing Rife's name were marketed as cures for diverse diseases such as cancer and AIDS. An analysis by _Electronics Australia_ found that a typical 'Rife device' consisted of a nine-volt battery, wiring, a switch, a timer and two short lengths of copper tubing, which delivered an "almost undetectable" current unlikely to penetrate the skin.[SUP][7][/SUP] Several marketers of other 'Rife devices' have been convicted for health fraud, and in some cases cancer patients who used these devices as a replacement for medical therapy have died.[SUP][8][/SUP] Rife devices are currently classified as a subset of radionics devices, which are generally viewed as pseudomedicine by mainstream experts.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 10, 2014)

Well, they laughed at Tesla as well ...

The problem I have with Western medicine is that they are powerful enough to demand "proof" of a treatment, and the parameters that have to be met just do NOT fit in with the holistic modalities. You're comparing apples with oranges.

It's like science and religion - you _cannot_ use one to disprove the other, yet every day people are turning away (or BEING turned away) from potentially life-saving methods because they don't meet the "Seal of Approval" of the juggernaut known as Corporate Medicine.


----------



## RCynic (Mar 10, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> Well, they laughed at Tesla as well ...
> 
> The problem I have with Western medicine is that they are powerful enough to demand "proof" of a treatment, and the parameters that have to be met just do NOT fit in with the holistic modalities. You're comparing apples with oranges.
> 
> It's like science and religion - you _cannot_ use one to disprove the other, yet every day people are turning away (or BEING turned away) from potentially life-saving methods because they don't meet the "Seal of Approval" of the juggernaut known as Corporate Medicine.



Yeah, that's where we're different. I do not believe in any religions or other superstitions. I believe in what can be clearly proven to me by what basically boils down to the scientific method. I'm a scientist at heart and if it is not repeatable, testable and falsifiable, then my answer is that I don't believe. It's worked for me fine the last 40+ years so that's where I am.


----------



## d0ug (Mar 11, 2014)

Facts are stubborn things.
  From the mouths of the medical system.
  Chemotherapy was proven to be 97% ineffective in the treatment of adult onset cancers by a study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
  Doctors get a fee for recommending chemo. [kick back]

  On the other side there is sea cucumber. The drug companies don't make it so doctors can't give it to you.

http://www.naturalnews.com/042506_sea_cucumber_breast_cancer_cells_lung_tumors.html#

  When people have a strong erg to live they will survive despite what they do to them


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 11, 2014)

RCynic said:


> Yeah, that's where we're different. I do not believe in any religions or other superstitions.



Nor do I. 



> I believe in what can be clearly proven to me by what basically boils down to the scientific method. I'm a scientist at heart and if it is not repeatable, testable and falsifiable, then my answer is that I don't believe. It's worked for me fine the last 40+ years so that's where I am.



Understood - I served my time at Union Carbide, General Foods and Exide Batteries as a chemist and safety manager and I understand the mind-set.

But I'm also a practitioner of traditional Chinese medicine (well, retired) and I've seen too many successful treatments to totally disregard it.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 11, 2014)

Just sayin said:


> ... Taking care of yourself is fine, but when catastrophe arrives its time to reach for the unfortunately expensive plastic boxes.



That's what they've trained us to believe. The constant bombardment of advertising, perfectly targeted to our fears ... the lingering perception that "doctor knows best" ... the awe in which we view the entire medical profession ...

I'm not sure of all the laws concerning patenting (nor even many of them), but I believe that a natural substance by itself cannot be patented. Now, granted, if you mix in some synthetics and give it a catchy new name then yes, you can probably own it, but then the efficiency of the original substance is reduced. 

Another possible problem they might foresee is that the general public isn't quite as dumb as they are assumed to be - that they'll discover what the true active ingredient is and simply go out into their backyard and pick some.


----------



## Vivjen (Mar 11, 2014)

Bayer did that with aspirin...


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 11, 2014)

Bayer has a very dark history, not the least of which is the disputes that Hoffman was the first to "create" aspirin. They went through quite a bit of litigation in the early 1900's fighting the documented claims from other scientists who had ostensibly come up with the same formulation many years prior. 

Bayer aspirin is what - 90% actetylsalicylic acid and 10% binder and filler? So they add a little paste to willow bark extract and suddenly they're the saviors of the world? 

Meh.


----------



## d0ug (Mar 11, 2014)

SifuPhil said:


> Bayer has a very dark history, not the least of which is the disputes that Hoffman was the first to "create" aspirin. They went through quite a bit of litigation in the early 1900's fighting the documented claims from other scientists who had ostensibly come up with the same formulation many years prior.
> 
> Bayer aspirin is what - 90% actetylsalicylic acid and 10% binder and filler? So they add a little paste to willow bark extract and suddenly they're the saviors of the world?
> 
> Meh.



  When you said Bayer has a dark history were you talking about I B Farben   the mother of Bayer that funded 100% of Auschwitz concentration camp. Later they changed there uniforms for suites. This same company that shipped aids infected products to Europe and Latin America.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spnEaO3yumk


----------



## Pappy (Mar 11, 2014)

I tried some fish oil once and broke out in hives. I told the wife they were fish scales.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 11, 2014)

They aren't just plants - they're minerals and animal as well ...

Like anything in life of any worth, you have to have knowledge of what you're doing. You can't just traipse through the woods picking this and chewing that, otherwise you'll end up as bear-food. 

Knowledge.

And you cannot short-cut the process by ordering from WWW.WeBeHolistic.com - I would venture to say that 90% of holistic suppliers are con-men. The main problem is that you do not know what you're getting, and even if it IS what they claim you don't know how long it's been sitting around in some warehouse somewhere, losing its potency.

But gee - we don't know what we're getting with those cheap 'scripts, either! We're trusting ol' Doc Sawbones to give up what we need - not to cure, mind you, just to cover up the symptoms. The fact that he long ago stopped being an observer of the Hippocratic Oath in lieu of becoming a pill-pusher shouldn't affect our judgment ... 

And of course your meds are cheaper - you're "in the system". You're hooked. They have you and you know it. They've somehow managed to convince you that what they're shoving down your throat is actually good for you. And of course, when the symptoms disappear you think you're cured.

I acknowledge that the main drawback of holistics is NOT that they don't work - it's that you have to devote so much time and effort to learning what DOES.



d0ug said:


> When you said Bayer has a dark history were you talking about I B Farben   the mother of Bayer that funded 100% of Auschwitz concentration camp. Later they changed there uniforms for suites. This same company that shipped aids infected products to Europe and Latin America.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spnEaO3yumk



That's a very large part of it, yes, dOug. :encouragement:


----------



## RCynic (Mar 11, 2014)

I think that there is a lot of fast and loose information here passing for knowledge.

Also, relative to treating symptoms vs. a "cure", I had this discussion with a physician who was a customer of mine. We were discussing AIDS treatments and I remarked that it was still incurable. He cited a number of studies with recent drug combinations that had been very effective in prolonging life. When I suggested that prolonging life was not a cure, he said, "Well, sure it is. If I can treat your symptoms successfully enough that you lead a relatively normal life, until such time as you die from something else, as far as the medical community is concerned, you were effectively cured of that disease." 

His point is valid. What is the point of any treatment? To give one back one's life to live, until such time as something that can't be fixed takes us. It really doesn't matter if it's just treating the symptoms very effectively, or eliminating it entirely as with some parasites. Some thing's cannot be "cured" however, the only thing that can be done is to treat symptoms. Retroviruses fall into this class because they integrate themselves into your genome. 

At NCI, we worked with MMTV, Mouse Mammary Tumor Virus, you could treat the mice with certain hormones, certain chemicals, other types of insults and low and behold, their mammary gland cells started cranking out MMTV; you could see virus budding from mammary epithelium where there was none in the non-treated controls. Where did they come from? From the genome of the mice themselves. There is currently no way of getting rid of something like that. We see exactly the same things with the Varicella virus which causes Chicken Pox. It integrates into our genome, waits around for years and then the virus spontaneously appears from our own cells as Shingles.


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 11, 2014)

RCynic said:


> I think that there is a lot of fast and loose information here passing for knowledge.




In what way?



> Also, relative to treating symptoms vs. a "cure", I had this discussion with a physician who was a customer of mine. We were discussing AIDS treatments and I remarked that it was still incurable. He cited a number of studies with recent drug combinations that had been very effective in prolonging life. When I suggested that prolonging life was not a cure, he said, "Well, sure it is. If I can treat your symptoms successfully enough that you lead a relatively normal life, until such time as you die from something else, as far as the medical community is concerned, you were effectively cured of that disease."



Silly me - I always thought that_ quality_ of life was far more important than _quantity_. 

What your physician friend perhaps did not allude to was that this method of treatment also guaranteed a nice steady income stream.



> His point is valid. What is the point of any treatment? To give one back one's life to live, until such time as something that can't be fixed takes us. It really doesn't matter if it's just treating the symptoms very effectively, or eliminating it entirely as with some parasites. Some thing's cannot be "cured" however, the only thing that can be done is to treat symptoms. Retroviruses fall into this class because they integrate themselves into your genome.



Agreed that some things cannot be cured, by ANY means - that's not what I'm referring to, though. I'm talking about everyday illnesses. I'm talking depression, I'm talking irritable bowel, I'm talking headache - the thousand and one little afflictions that we're subjected to in the course of a lifetime that could be treated AND CURED by safer alternative methods.


----------



## RCynic (Mar 13, 2014)

Sorry to be tardy...got involved in a good book.

Anyway, I was just coming back to the issue of belief vs. knowledge. I realize there are all kinds of esoteric arguments about that but I'm talking at a pretty basic level. I believe I have $2 in my pocket, but I don't "know" for sure, until I check...that element of being testable. I can believe there are teapots in the rings of Saturn but that is, currently, beyond our ability to test, so it doesn't really qualify as knowledge. So, we can believe things but unless they can be tested and repeatably yield results beyond what simple chance would yield, then there is really no reason to believe, other than a desire to do so. As Hitchens said, "What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence".

Regarding probability, there is also the issue of how we acquire knowledge. Logically deducing something does not mean it is correct. In fact, deductive arguments by their very nature, even though correctly argued, are frequently inherently false. Instead, we acquire knowledge of the world around us from inductive probability. And this is also the essence of how science works.

My customer physician was in the Public Health Service doing research. He didn't receive money for practicing medicine, which he did at a clinic free of charge. This was coming from a really good guy and a decent person. He was just stating how it is.

I think eventually we will cure just about everything that ails us, provided we can successfully identify it. I will never see that in my lifetime of course but again, we've only been at this for the very briefest of time given how long our various ailments have had to become part of us.


----------



## d0ug (Mar 13, 2014)

Wholistic medicine has been around for years and taken as good science. for example putting back into the body what is missing scurvy was a vitamin C deficiency and when people ate lemons it when away, rickets was a vitamin D deficiency disease and people sat in the sun and it when away, pellagra a simple vitamin B3 deficiency, beriberi a simple vitamin B1 deficiency, Iron-deficiency anemia self explanatory, Osteoporosis a calcium phosphorus and vitamin D, Most all birth defects are mineral and vitamin deficiencies.  The list of mineral deficiency diseases would fill many pages.

  I don’t know of any disease which is a lack of pharmaceutical drugs. 
  Stopping symptoms with drugs is the stupid. It would be like when the red light comes on in your car is a symptom of a problem and cutting the wire dose not fix the problem only get rid of the symptom


----------



## RCynic (Mar 13, 2014)

I don't know of anyone that ever claimed that lack of a pharmaceutical drug caused a disease. Defective genomes, metabolic errors, pathogens, chemical toxicity, all these things cause disease. Certain drugs can kill pathogens, interferon can interfere in virus replication, vaccines to not occur in nature, but their development by man virtually eliminated polio and small pox. The latter is now found mainly in research labs and the former is recurring in third world countries because people have not been getting vaccinated (for economic reasons). Furthermore, some of the pharmaceuticals you distain are in fact naturally occuring compounds. When science recognizes a legitimate use for them, they have no hesitation to being it to market. Taxol, extracted from the common yew for example, is an extemely potent anti-cancer drug. Pharmaceutical companies are collecting like crazy from the South American rain forests in a race to identify future drug candidates before the forests are decimated. The list goes on and on. It is emphatically not stupid to stop symptoms with drugs. It is however stupid to deny their benefits in treating serious illness.


----------



## Tom Young (Mar 15, 2014)

Life expectancy:
1900 - 48 yrs.
2000 - 78 yrs.


----------



## d0ug (Mar 16, 2014)

If the only information comes from the medical system you will not hear the truth you will hear what benefits the medical system. They only make money when you are sick they make nothing when you are well.

  Defective genomes Dr Watson of Watson and Crick the people who founded the genome research said that it has nothing to do with disease. There is a new science call epigenetics which explains all these so called genetic problems.
  Yes thank goodness to antibiotics and pain killers but for any chronic ailments the medical system sucks.
  The vaccines are a fraud and any search will give you the answer. The old bate and switch used by crooks they cured polio by giving t a different name. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRNFoHOsaw0
  Yes the pharmaceutical are searching the world for natural cures they can turn into drugs and if it can not be you will not hear about it. One was sour sop they done research and showed it was 10,000 times better than chemo. But they could not make it as a drug so you will not see it. One doctor who was on the study broke the gag order to get the information out.

  Tom Young
  Thanks for bringing up Life expectancy
  Longer life had to do with sanitation and not medical system.
  Life expectancy
  U.S. Doctors 56 years
  Couch potato  75 years
  A child living in the country side of Costa   Rica  no doctor 100+ years


----------



## SifuPhil (Mar 16, 2014)

Tom Young said:


> Life expectancy:
> 1900 - 48 yrs.
> 2000 - 78 yrs.



Quality of Life Index ratings:

1900 - 8.321
2000 - 7.605


----------



## lonelynorthwind (Mar 16, 2014)

The debate rages on in my head over natural remedies and modern medicine.  However, I haven't been to a doctor in nearly 30 years.  But I am one of the lucky few to live with pure air and water where wild medicines and wonderful wild foods grow just for the taking.  

 What bothers me the most is it appears to me that doctors have become primarily sales representatives for big pharma.   It astonishes and saddens me when I so often see folks who depend on doctors consume one drug after another, some to cover the effects of the other until their bodies don't know what the heck is going on!  Prescriptions that are advertised all day on the networks, "ask your doctor, ask your doctor"... ads that require more time to rattle off the side effects than to tout any possible benefits, some life threatening.  Prescriptions that warn not to stop taking it!  What the?

I know it's hard when you live in a city but I can't help think that a healthy diet and lifestyle goes a lot farther to stay well than any chemical drugs.  With the internet it's easier than ever to at least try a natural remedy before running to the doctor for another drug, or eat a healthier diet.  I just hate to see so many people so dependent on synthetic drugs and I don't think it's all necessary.

A favorite story is of an old native man who didn't know he was diabetic until he was drafted in WW2.  His gramma had always made him drink the root of a plant growing here that kept his blood sugar balanced.  In the white man's world, of course, he had to take shots.


----------

