Thursday, 4 February 2016

Britain's NHS in crisis

The British NHS is in crisis. And no-where is this made more obvious than in the doctor's magazine, Pulse. During the past two days, alone, the topics covered have emphasised that the conventional medical establishment is progressively failing to cope with the demands of patients.

Any regular reader of this blog will know the reason for this crisis. It is entirely predictable. For years, increased demand for conventional medical services, through the NHS, has been funded by regular, andmassive increases in expenditure. Now, despite the huge amounts being spent on the NHS, demand for health services continues to rise, and government money is running out!

Why should this be? The NHS is dominated by pharmaceutical drugs. These drugs cause 'side effects', which are really new diseases. In other words, treat an illness with drugs, and patients get sicker, their demands increase. So many chronic diseases are now running at epidemic levels - asthma, autism, arthritis, cancer, dementia, heart disease, et al. The failure of drugs to deal effectively with any of these conditions leads to increased surgery, to increased levels of health care needs, blocked hospital beds, waiting lists increase, and so on.

Reading these articles from the GP magazine 'Pulse' demonstrates all this.

Revealed: GP training targets in doubt as applications tumble 5%
There is a shortage of doctors going into general practice. The government wants to increase the number of GPs by 5,000 over the next 4 years. One way of increasing the supply of doctors is to train more, but unfortunately those wishing to enter has been diminishing for a number of years, and this despite considerable advertising.

Over 100 GP trainees set for £20k 'golden hello' to work in areas with shortages
The shortage of doctors is particularly apparent in certain areas, and there is now a £20,000 incentive for new doctors to go to these areas. However, doctors leaders are saying that there needs to be a greater incentive than this. It would appear that there are few limits to the demands being made on the NHS to provide conventional medicine!

600 practices could benefit from £10m NHS 'vulnerable practice' fund
The financial pressures on some GP practices has led to the Department of Health providing a pot of £10 million to support them. This article says that 600 practices are vulnerable, and need help from this scheme - highlighting exactly how deep the failure is with the NHS.

Closer inspection of practices’ antibiotics prescribing
Doctors have been asked to restrict the prescription of antibiotics drugs for many years, not because of the dangers, but because resistance to the drugs is now reaching the stage when no antibiotic works in treating infection. So the NHS is trying to force doctors to stop prescribing them. This means that the most magic of all the 'magic bullets' of conventional medicine is failing, and this will have dire consequences for any patient who continues to rely on drugs for health. Similarly, conventional medicine is trying to reduce the prescription of painkillers and antidepressants because of their serious side effects.

Local council strips GP practices of NHS Health Checks
Despite the vast sums spent directly on the NHS, local councils have hitherto also had budgets to spend on conventional health care, notably the NHS Health Checks programme. This expenditure is now being reduced or stopped, placing further strain on doctors.

1 in 10 young people treated for depression actually have undiagnosed bipolar disorder
A study has found that conventional medicine's ability to diagnose illness is poor. For depression and bipolar we can insert almost any other disease. Testing is at the heart of the practice of conventional medicine and it is regularly found wanting. So even though all drugs produce side effects (new diseases) doctors are giving patients the wrong drugs!

Chronic fatigue syndrome affects 2% of teens, study finds
Chronic fatigue syndrome, or ME was not even recognised as an illness within the NHS twenty years ago! Now a study finds that 2% of teenagers suffers from it! Teenagers! Not older people. No young children. What is causing this epidemic in people who should be at the height of wellness? The article does not say, but we now have a population of young people who have had multiple vaccinations, antibiotics, painkillers, and much else, than any other generation. And it is making them sicker than ever before!

Trusts unable to keep up with increase in GP cancer referrals
Inability to cope with chronic disease is at the heart of the failure of conventional drug-based medicine. It is pharmaceutical drugs that increase the incidence of diseases such as cancer. And conventional medicine is unable to cope with the demands being made upon it. We can replace cancer with almost any other serious chronic disease. They are running at ever-increasing, epidemic levels. Cancer used to be considered to be a disease caused by ageing. Yet young children and babies are now contracting cancer, in ever increasing numbers. And the conventional medical system does not recognise the part played by pharmaceutical drugs in generating this situation.

This article also emphasises that the failure of our GP's does not stop at the surgery, they are passed on to the hospitals, where demand for services has been increasing for decades, and demands on Accident and Emergency units, through to demands for end of life care, all require more resources.

Corbyn grills Cameron on cancer diagnostics waits
The failure of conventional medicine to deal with the cancer epidemic is highlighted again by Pulse in this article, which reports that the Leader of the Opposition has 'grilled' the Prime Minister about the failure of the NHS to cope with the demand for cancer treatment. It has long been part of the political battle over the British NHS - which political party is proposing to spend most on propping up the conventional medical system. The bidding and outbidding continues, with no recognition that money and resources is not the issue. The issue is that we are spending money on a failed medical system!

The comments made at the foot of each of these articles are made by doctors who appear to have little idea of what is happening. 

They want more money, because if they could have more money they could do a better job. But for decades they have been given increased budgets, and nothing has change. There is little or no understanding that they are part of a failed medical experiment. Their drugs do not work. They make matters worse. More money will only mean more drugs, more side effects, and more sickness and disease.

So through these articles, Pulse appears to know what the problem is. But unfortunately it has no answers, other than adding more resources to a failing enterprise. Remember, that these articles are just those appearing in one magazine, over two days, covering just one part of the NHS. Every day, in every area of the NHS, similar stories are appearing - about increased sickness and disease - about difficulties in coping with demand - about the need for more resources.

When a ship is travelling in the wrong direction the captain needs to turn it around, to find a new course, and follow it. There is little points increasing power and speed. However, first it is necessary for the captain to recognise it is moving in the wrong direction!


Thursday, 28 January 2016

BBC News is not interested in fraudulent medical research. They refuse to tell us about it.

In my blog, dated 14th December 2015, "The Refusal of BBC News to report important information", I told you about my complaint to the BBC.

It concerned the issue of whether the MMR vaccine was a cause of Autism, the 2004 study which said there was no link, and the 2014 revelation that one of the co-authors of that study had reveal that the research have fraudulently omitted important data that would have proven there was a link, particularly with black children.

For a concise explanation of the back of this situation, watch this 'Truth in Media' video, which is one of the best descriptions of the situation I have found.

This is the latest email response I have received from the BBC.

          "Thank you for contacting us again about MMR Vaccine link to Autism. In our last response, we informed you of our editorial position, after having flagged up your complaint with senior staff at the News. We said that nothing which has been said or published since then has caused us to alter our view and gave you a link to a comprehensive list of Q&As on the subject. We’re sorry if you still feel we’ve not helped you with your concerns."

          "We’re sorry to tell you that we’ve nothing to add to our previous reply. We don’t believe your complaint has raised a significant issue of general importance that might justify further investigation. We will not therefore correspond further in response to additional points, or further comments or questions, made about this issue or our responses to it."

If you watch the video, and then read this response from the BBC, you will be able to judge for yourself the enormity of the cover-up and the censorship being practiced by the mainstream media on behalf of the conventional medical establishment!

In this the BBC are not alone. I am not aware that any other organisation that can be construed as part of the mainstream media, in the UK, in the USA, or elsewhere, have carried this story. This does not surprise me. It is typical of the approach adopted by all large media organisation when dealing with the conventional medical establishment - see no evil, hear no evil.  Or perhaps, do no evil to the pharmaceutical companies. Allow them to continue doing evil to the public!

I have now written to the BBC Trust to take my complaint further. I have not only repeated my concern that if there is any doubt whatsoever that vaccines can cause autism the public should be told about that doubt.

This is particularly so for a public service broadcaster. The BBC does not receive income from advertisers, including drug advertisements. The BBC does not have drug company representatives on their board, and vice versa. Most viewers, listeners, readers of BBC News would expect to hear news that is impartial, not censored. BBC licence payers would expect that they are being told, openly and honestly, about health issues - including the harm that drugs and vaccines can do to our health.

If there is any doubt, whatsoever, that the MMR vaccine might be a linked with the epidemic of autism, parents should be told about that information, they should have the evidence, they should know before they decide whether to submit their children for the vaccination.

If the BBC had been honest enough to provide the information beyond the 2004 study, even if they had informed us that the 2004 study was fraudulent in 2014, as they could have done, how many children would have been able to develop normally, without the handicaps caused to children within the autism spectrum?

Every family in Britain, especially those with autistic children, should be demanding an apology from mainstream news organisations, but particularly the BBC, who have a very specific responsibility to inform the public about important issues like this.

Anyone who wants to complain to the BBC about their censorship of this issue should click on this link, and ask why they have failed to inform them about this fraudulent research.

Tuesday, 26 January 2016

Zika Virus. Are we being told the truth?

Like most people I have been listening to the dreadful news from Brazil, where over 4,000 babies have been born with abnormally small heads, and shrunken brains in the last 3 months. Previously, only 150 annual cases of microcephaly had been known.

This disaster has been blamed on the Zika virus, which is transmitted by the mosquito. On 21st January 2016 BBC News, alongside the rest of the media, reported:

          "The Brazilian authorities believe the increase is caused by an outbreak of Zika virus."

Today (26th January 2016), BBC News reported the outbreak as 'Zika virus', and interview conventional medical staff who gave advice, but offered no treatment, and someone who is developing genetically engineered mosquitos as a possible solution! No mention that the cause of the microcephaly is unknown, or that the Zika virus is only a suspected cause. So presumably the cause of this dreadful outbreak has now been confirmed.

I was suspicious. But so, apparently, are the people of Brazil. This article from the 'Unhived Mind' website, "Brazilians not buying Zika excuse for babies with shrunken brains" offers a reason to suspect that we are not being told the truth, and an alternative explanation.

First the connection between this outbreak of microcephaly has been linked with Zika virus because a small number of babies who died had the virus in their brain. This is the reasonable conclusion reached in the article:

          "Now I will translate this: There was a zika outbreak in Brazil. There was a huge surge in shrunken baby brains in Brazil. ONLY A SMALL NUMBER OF BABIES WHO DIED HAD THE VIRUS IN THEIR BRAIN. This means A LARGE NUMBER OF THE BABIES WHO DIED HAD NO ZIKA IN THEIR BRAIN. OUTPUT: The zika cases were coincidental, with the real problem completely unknown."

Second, they then quote BBC News' previous account of the outbreak, which stated that "Zika is generally mild and only causes symptoms in one in five people".

The 'Unhived Mind' article also comments of this.

          "Ok so a do nothing virus is going around that only makes one in five people get mildly sick, with no symptoms in 4 out of 5 people. This virus has been known about since before 1948 and has never been known to cause birth defects. Since this is a proven mild virus with no history of causing birth defects, AND because a LARGE MAJORITY of babies with the new birth defects have no zika, then Zika is not causing it and someone is definitely beyond all doubt just using Zika as an excuse for something else, which strongly suggests a motive, and who would have a motive for blaming a huge surge in birth defects on a known benign virus that is not even present in a majority of cases?"

So what is the cause of this microcephaly outbreak if it is not the Zika virus?

A new TDAP vaccine was made mandatory at the beginning of 2015!

          "..... which coincides with perfect timing with a whole bunch of newborns being born with defects. That’s right, in late 2014 the Brazilian minister of health announced a new TDAP shot to become mandatory for all expectant mothers..."

So, as they comment, no zika was found in a majority of microcephalic babies, but all mothers with microcephalic babies got the vaccine whilst they were pregnant.

Now, what exactly is the TDAP vaccine, and how can we avoid it? I certainly had not heard of it. But apparently it is a new form of DPT vaccine, the vaccine every young child is given, 3 times, in the early months of their lives!

So could the conventional medical establishment have found yet another vaccine that causes serious birth defects? And is the pharmaceutical industry, and their friends, including WHO, the Bill Gates Foundation, et al., embarking on a cover up?

If there is any truth in this, conventional medicine will have to act quickly and effectively.

  • They will have to denounce this as a 'conspiracy' theory. 
  • They will have to convince us that it is mosquitos, and not Big Pharma, who have caused this microcephaly. 
  • They will have to move quickly to defend mandatory vaccination, especially the vaccination of pregnant women.
  • They will have to convince us that the TDAP vaccine is different to the DPT vaccine that they have been giving our children for decades.
And perhaps most difficult of all, the pharmaceutical industry, and conventional medical doctors, will have to convince us that this time they are telling the truth about this matter!


The world of homeopathy needs to know the truth. If we believe that the Zika virus is causing this, we will have to work on this basis, and spend time looking for a remedy - and probably not finding one if misled in this way! If it is caused by the DPT vaccine we can antidote the vaccine.

Or better still, the vaccine could be immediately and completely withdrawn! 

That will not happen, of course, they will not accept the link even if, or when it is proven. With the conventional medical establishment it is all cloaks and mirrors. They cause disease with one drug, then develop another drug for that disease, and profit from both. Ofuscation rules in this situation as it does in so many others. Denial follows denial. Lies, damned lies - and the conventional medical establishment!

Postcript (27th January 2016)
There is an issue in Britain about the use of the Pertussin (Whooping Cough) vaccine with pregnant women. The NHS Choices website seems to recommend it, even saying that it is safe.

          "Pregnant women can safely help protect their babies by getting vaccinated – ideally when they are 28-32 weeks pregnant, although they may be given the vaccine up to 38 weeks of pregnancy. "

My understanding is that Brazil is using the Boostrix IPV with pregnant women. So should it be used with pregnant women? NHS Choices refers to the licence agreement for the vaccine, stating that it allows its use, when clearly needed, and when 'possible benefits outweigh the possible risk'.  Yet it goes on to say this:

          "It is standard practice with most medicines not to test them on pregnant women. This is why the manufacturer's information leaflet includes this statement, and not because of any specific safety concerns or evidence of harm in pregnancy."

Well, not testing a drug which has 'possible risks' suggests that doctors don't know what those risk are, but regardless, the vaccine is being used with women.

          "Pertussis-containing vaccine has been used routinely in pregnant women in the UK since October 2012 and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is carefully monitoring its safety. The MHRA's study of around 20,000 women vaccinated with Repevax found no evidence of risks to pregnancy or pregnancy outcome."

So, conventional medicine giving pregnant women an untested drug, presumably hoping for the best, but 'monitoring its safety'. Given the track record of such monitoring it is unlikely that any association between the vaccine and possible side effects would be admitted, or perhaps blamed on some other cause (although, of course, there are no mosquitos to blame in Britain).

The situation would appear to be the same in the USA. NHS Choices state that this vaccine is 'routinely recommend in the US for immunisation of pregnant women', and again, there 'no safety concerns have been identified'.

Or, perhaps as in Brazil, no safety concerns have been admitted by the conventional medical establishment there!

As I said, it is all smoke and mirrors. No consumer of pharmaceutical drugs or vaccines can be confident about anything they are told about either their safety or effectiveness.

Wednesday, 20 January 2016

The demise of antibiotics. A blessing in disguise?

Resistance to antibiotics have reached a stage when they will soon be totally ineffective. As antibiotics are conventional medicine's main drug, their most magic of 'magic bullets' for the past 70 years, doctors are beginning to warn us about Armageddon. How will they be able to respond to infection? How will they be able to continue operating on patients, and still keep control of any resulting infection.

The imminent failure of antibiotics is, of course, the fault of doctors. They have so few drugs that are effective they have used them too much, even with illnesses that do not respond to them - and doctors were aware that the illness would not respond to antibiotics.

The conventional medical establishment has also been reluctant to admit the serious and devastating damage that has been caused by antibiotic drugs. Indeed, they have probably refused to observe and understand the damage they have been causing, and certainly refused to tell patients. I have written about this in many previous blogs, including these two:

          Antibiotics. Not as safe as we have been told?

          Antibiotics. The failure of ConMed's wonder drug.

So is the demise of antibiotics an unmitigated disaster? Or can something positive come from this latest failure of conventional, drug-based medicine? First, though, the 'success' of antibiotics have to be placed in perspective.

  • Many people continue to die from a variety of infections diseases throughout the world. The 'charity' of the pharmaceutical companies begins at home - where profits can be made. In the developing, and third world's, they have less impact
  • Antibiotics are expensive, slow to produce, difficult to distribute and administer. Their use in the emerging economies has therefore been slow.
  • Above all, they have produced some serious side effects, about which the conventional medical establishment remains persistently silent.

The Homeoplus website has suggested a future direction for dealing with infections, one that is already being used in many other countries, with outstanding success. As it says, homeopathy first rose to prominence through its effective treatment and prevention of diseases such as cholera and typhoid in the 19th century. Something of this history, the successful treatment of infections without antibiotics, can be seen in this Homeoplus article.

Homeopathic remedies exist for all epidemic diseases. And, as Homeoplus says, governments throughout the world are aware of this, and they are making use of them.

  • The Indian government controls epidemics of malaria, Japanese encephalitis, dengue fever, and epidemic fever with homeopathy.
  • The Cuban government now depends on homeopathy to manage its leptospirosis epidemics and dengue fever outbreaks.
  • The Brazilian government funded two large trials that successfully reduced the incidence of meningococcal disease in those given the homeopathy prophylactic.
  • The governments of Thailand, Colombo and Brazil use homeopathy to manage dengue fever outbreaks and epidemics.
So the solution to the failure of antibiotics is readily available to us. Whether the conventional medical establishment will have the magnanimity to recognise its own failure, and to look to homeopathy (which it has long lambasted) is quite another matter!



Tuesday, 19 January 2016

Drug Trials in France. Just another part of the mayhem caused by Big Pharma!

A man left brain dead, and then dying. Five other people being treated in hospital in the French city of Rennes, four of whom have serious 'neurological' problems. Concern about the health of the 90 other fit and healthy young people involved. The Paris prosecutor opening an investigation.

Just another mundane event in the life and history of the Big Pharma companies?

The Portuguese drug company, Bial, was apparently testing a cannabis-based painkiller. The drug trial has been 'suspended'.

BBC News tells us that "this is the bitter price of the new medicines we take for granted. Testing such experimental drugs, at the cutting edge of science, can never be completely risk-free." Their analysis goes on, blandly and unquestioningly.

          "The safety and effectiveness of these drugs are rigorously tested in animals." 
          "The risks are low......"
          "This trial has been taking place since July without such major events being reported."
          "It is a high price to pay, but thousands of people do safely take part in similar trials each year."
           "The trial was conducted by Biotrial, a French-based company with an international reputation which has carried out thousands of trials since it was set up in 1989."
          "Before any new medicine can be given to patients, detailed information about how it works and how safe it is must be collected."
          "Clinical trials are the key to getting that data, and without volunteers to take part in the trials, there would be no new treatments for serious diseases ......."

So the BBC's 'analysis', typically, is more about justifying the process of developing conventional medical drugs than seriously questioning what has gone on in this case. I focus on the BBC, but the coverage in most of the mainstream media was similar. Yet as a public service broadcaster they should, surely, know better.

They should be more questioning, do more investigation, and be more critical of what they are told by the drug-dominated, drug obsessed conventional health establishment!

Pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines kill millions of people throughout the world every year. Every one of them have gone through this process of testing, but they continue to cause disease and kill patients. Our mainstream media seems oblivious to this - it is, they tell us, a necessary evil - otherwise "there would be no new treatments for serious diseases..."

So most people, most patients, don't ask too many questions. They don't have the information. They just take the pill. Surely, we think, our doctors would not give us anything that is unsafe!

In 2006 at Northwick Park Hospital in London, drug trials almost killed six young volunteers. The drug, TGN 1312 was designed to treat multiple sclerosis, leukaemia and arthritis. The manufacturer, TeGenero, thought the drug would 'subtly retune' the immune system, but instead, it catastrophically turned the immune system against the very body it was supposed to protect, and caused multiple organ failure, and left them battling for their lives for several weeks. One victim had to have several fingers and toes amputated. All six men were told they would be likely to develop cancers or auto-immune diseases as a result of the drug.

At the time this story made headline news, not because drug trials are normally safe, they aren't, but the outcome in this case (and presumably the one in France too) was almost instantaneous. It could not be denied or discounted, the consequences on fit and health young volunteers was so obvious and drastic. The pharmaceutical industry has a long and infamous history of hiding, even destroying trial data that is detrimental to their main interest - selling drugs, regardless of the dangers to our health.

The BBC has told us that the Northwick Park drug, just like the new one in France, had previously been tested on animals, apparently without any "side-effects". So the media has invented no new justification for the devastation caused by Big Pharma drug trials - they are quite happy with the old ones! And this particular one should teach us one other lesson too.

That animal testing is completely worthless, and fails to protect young, fit volunteers, and later, of course, to the millions of patients subjected to the drug.

Yet the pharmaceutical drugs industry has a long history of disastrous, and deeply disturbing drug trials. President Clinton of the USA admitted this on 16th May 1997.

           "The United States government did something that was wrong - deeply, profoundly, morally wrong. It was an outrage to our commitment to integrity and equality for all our citizens. . . . clearly racist".

This refers to the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis experiments that took place between 1932 and 1972. This involved 399 black men, in the late stages of syphilis. The men, illiterate sharecroppers from Alabama, were never told they had the disease, or about its seriousness, but were told they were being treated for 'bad blood'. The sharecroppers were pleased at the prospect of 'free medical care', but the purpose and consequences of the experiment were kept from them in order to ensure their cooperation. Indeed, the doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis. Instead, data was collected from autopsies after they had been deliberately allowed to degenerate and die. 

The purpose of the study, apparently, was to discover how syphilis affected black people, as opposed to white people. It has been estimated that by the end of the experiment 28 men died directly of syphilis, 100 died with related complications, 40 wives had been infected, and 19 children were born with congenital syphilis. 

What the benefits of such an experiment were is difficult to imagine!

Perhaps the drug companies will, one day, tell us! Yet this story gets worse. Apparently, the men were kept from receiving any treatment that might have helped them. When penicillin became available in the 1940s the Tuskegee 'guinea pigs' were denied the medication!

These drug trial were eventually uncovered by the Washington Star in 1972 (at a time when investigative journalism was still possible within the mainstream media). Only then did the government end the experiment. Even so, the drug companies remained unrepentant, claiming the men had been volunteers and were always happy to see the doctors!

For the full story see "Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment" by James H. Jones (New York: Free Press, 1993).

However, the government did not accept the media's comparison of Tuskegee with the appalling Nazi experiments on Jewish victims during World War II. 

Nor has the bad practice surrounding drug trials stopped, with drugs and vaccines notoriously being 'tested' in poor 3rd world countries. The film 'The Constant Gardiner' outlines the kind of activity drug companies get involved in in Africa, and other parts of the world.


So whilst the BBC, and other mainstream news organisations, may not want to focus on what the pharmaceutical drugs companies are doing, and have been doing for many decades, it is important that we should all know - particularly those people who are considering earning some money taking new drugs - and patients who are taking pharmaceutical drugs now.

More and more people are beginning to realise the dangers of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, despite the reluctance of the media to tell us. They are causing mayhem to our health. Many diseases are now at epidemic levels - and it is well known that pharmaceutical drugs are known to cause most, if not all of them. This is never admitted by the conventional health establishment, of course. And our doctors don't tell us. The links are never investigated by the BBC, of course, or any other part of the mainstream media. Our politicians don't tell us either, the Big Pharma industry is just too strong, to powerful to stand up to, and call to account.

So it is up to us, as individuals, to realise what is happening to our health, the part played by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, and to say, firmly, "No" when offered them - either as a volunteer tester, or as a patient.

After all, it would appear that no one else will look after our safety!


Friday, 15 January 2016

Treating Haemorrhoids (Piles). Why Homeopathy is best.


Haemorroids, or piles, are swellings that contain enlarged blood vessels that are found inside or around the rectum or anus. Ofteh, these cause mild discomfort. The main symptoms are
  • mucous discharge after passing a stool
  • bleeding after passing a stool
  • itchiness around anus
  • a lump hanging outside of the anus, which may need to be pushed back after passing a stool
When these symptoms become persistent the discomfort can become quite severe. Pregnancy can often cause haemorrhoids, which means that safe and effective treatment is even more important.

Conventional Medical Treatment for Haemorrhoids
The NHS Choices website has been used here as the source of information about the conventional medical treatment of this condition. Their treatment is aimed to reduce itching and discomfort, and their first recommendation is to make simple dietary changes (increasing dietary fibre), drinking lots of fluids, avoiding coffee, and ‘not straining’ on the toilet.

As far as medication is concerned, NHS Choices recommends various creams, ointments and suppositories that can relieve swelling and discomfort, but which cannot be used for more than 5-7 days as they can “irritate the sensitive skin around your anus”.

Corticosteroid cream is recommended if there is severe inflammation in or around the anus, but again these cannot be used for more than a week “as it can make the skin around your anus thinner and the irritation worse”.

Painkillers are then recommended, not for the treatment of piles, but to relieve the pain. NHS Choices warns, however, that codeine painkillers should be avoided as they cause constipation!

Laxatives
When piles are accompanied by constipation, laxatives are then prescribed, to help empty the bowels.

Non-surgical treatments
If these fail patients are referred to specialists, either for banding, sclerotherapy or surgery.

Banding
Banding involves placing a tight elastic band around the base of the haemorrhoids to cut off their blood supply. They should then fall off within about a week of having the treatment. If there is pain as a result of the procedure painkillers are used. NHS Choices warn that ulcers, open sores, can occur at the site of the banding, although these usually heal without needing treatment.

Sclerotherapy
This involves injecting a chemical solution into the blood vessels in your back passage, to relieve pain by numbing the nerve endings. It also hardens the tissue of the haemorrhoid so that a scar is formed. After about four to six weeks, the haemorrhoid should decrease in size or shrivel up.

Infrared coagulation
This involves “a special device that emits infrared light is used to burn the haemorrhoid tissue and cut off their blood supply”. A similar devise using an electric current is known as diathermy or electrotherapy.

Surgery
Ultimately, surgery is recommended, and NHS Choices says that around 1 in every 10 people will eventually need surgery. Surgery usually involves removing the haemorrhoids, or reducing their blood supply so that they shrink.

Homeopathic Treatment of Haemorrhoids
Homeopathy is a medical therapy that will avoid some of the side-effects and adverse reactions of conventional medical treatment. Homeopathy is the second most popular medical therapy in the world, and the most popular holistic system of medicine. Homeopathy is based on remedies made from a variety of different substances, all of which are known to cause symptoms of illness if taken in their normal form. However, homeopathy has discovered that substances that cause symptoms of illness can also cure those same symptoms of illness. 

This is the principle of “Like cures Like” on which all homeopathy is based.

The task of the homeopath is to find a remedy whose symptom picture matches the symptoms of a person’s illness. These remedy symptom pictures have been developed over the last 220 years.

The selection of a homeopathic remedy is based on the individual’s symptoms of illness, not on any broad conventionally-defined illness. It is important to stress this. Homeopathy does not treat illness or diseases. Instead it treats an individual who has been diagnosed with a particular illness or disease. The distinction is important, and if you wish to read more about this, click on the chapter “Illness Diagnosis”.

As far as haemorrhoids or piles are concerned, homeopathy has highlighted a number of remedies that have been found to be useful in its treatment. The Hpathy website has outlined some simple remedy pictures for a number of these remedies. All the remedies mentioned are safe, and any remedy that matches the patient’s symptoms will be effective. These simple remedy pictures give some indication of the types of symptoms they will treat.

Aesculus Hip
Abdominal plethora; throbbing deep in abdomen, particularly in hypogastric region; piles, bleeding or not, with feeling of dryness in rectum; as though little sticks or splinters were pricking the folds of the mucus membrane; weak feeling at sacro-iliac symphysis; though the legs were about to give out, worse by stooping forward and when walking; aching between shoulders; desire to strain at stool for a long time, pain shoot up the rectum; from the tumors, with lameness and aching in back, purple piles; depressed and irritable. Dark red congestion of fauces, with dryness and soreness, from abdominal plethora.

Collinsonia
This is an excellent remedy for piles; obstinate cases of piles; specially used  in females with inertia of the rectum and a congestive tendency to the pelvic organs; it suits a pregnant women who suffer from piles, and pruritus may be a marked symptom. The indicating symptoms are chiefly a sensation of sticks in the rectum, with constipation from inertia of the lower bowel. It is specially applicable to heart pains resulting from a suppression of a habitual haemorrhoidal flow.

Hamamelis
This is one of the best remedies for piles; bleeding piles; flow of blood is quite copious, and the great characterised indication is excessive soreness.

Aloes
This is one of the most useful remedies for piles; indicated where the piles protrude like a bunch of grapes, bleeding often and profusely, and are greatly relieved by the application of cold water. There is a very marked burning in the anus, the bowels feel as if scraped. There is a tendency to diarrhoea, with the well known uncertain feeling in the lower bowel.

Nux Vomica 
If the piles be large and blind, with a burning, stinging and constricted feeling in the rectum and a bruised pain in the small of back, and especially if excited by sedentary habits or abuse of stimulants, than Nux Vomica may be prescribed. Itching piles keeping the sufferer awake at night, relieved by cold water, or bleeding piles with constant urging to stool. And a feeling as if the bowel would not empty itself are further indications.

Capsicum
Bleeding or blind piles, protruding swollen, itching, throbbing and burning as if pepper were sprinkled on them. Sore feeling in the anus. Piles with mucus discharges, bloody mucus stool. Great thirst followed by shuddering after stool. Associated symptoms are persistent thoughts of suicide, lack of vital heat, craving for warm things, stimulants and pungent things.

Muriatic acid
Piles large, swollen, dark purple or blue haemorrhoides which are extremely sensitive and pains to touch. Inflamed piles, hot and pulsating, must lie with limbs wide apart, too sore, to bear least touch even the bed sheet is uncomfortable. Piles while urinating or with stool, bleeding piles with burning and cutting during and after stool. Ameliorated by warm application; aggravation by cold application.

Sulphur
Sulphur is a very good remedy for piles, when the constitutional symptoms are there. External and internal piles, great bunches that are sore and raw, burning and tender, and bleed and smart with loose stool, complaints aggravate when standing, when washing and from warmth of bed.

Ammonium carb
Piles protrude, independent of stool; protrusion of piles after stool with long lasting pains; cannot walk, or the piles protrude during a stool, and recede when lying down; they are usually moist and pain as if excoriated; bloody discharge during and after stool.

Arsenicum album
Piles bluish, swollen, inflamed, protruding and bunched, bleeding from least touch, with stitching, burning pains when walking or standing, but not at stool; burning and soreness in rectum and anus, aggravation at night; strangulated piles. Amelioration from warmth.

Kali carb
Stool dry, too large in size, rectum inactive, feels distressed an hour or two before stool; sensation as if a red hot poker were being thrust up the rectum, relieved by sitting in cold water; stinging, burning tearing, itching pain, even after a natural stool.

Lycopodium
Piles, painful while sitting; discharge of blood even with soft stool; itching eruption at the anus, painful to touch; burning and stitching pain in the rectum; pain in the sacral region, extending to the thighs.

Nitric acid
Long lasting cutting pain in the rectum after loose stool, with piles; haemorrhage bright red, not clotted, spasmodic tearing during stool from fissures in rectum.

Silicea
Piles intensely painful; boring, cramping from anus to rectum and testicles; piles protrude with stool and discharge bloody mucus.


However, for an accurate, individualised remedy section, patients should consult with a qualified homeopath. This increases the likelihood of matching an individual with a remedy that will work for them. A remedy that does not match the symptoms of an individual’s illness will not work!


Tuesday, 12 January 2016

WHO? Do pharmaceutical drugs cause disease?

I recently wrote a blog entitled "Cancer? Bad Luck? The environment? Or Big Pharma drug side effect?" The purpose of the blog was to highlight that whenever the cause of epidemic levels of cancer now haunting us are discussed the role of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are rarely, if ever considered.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) is the world's leading health organisation. It is part of the United Nations organisation, and came into being on 7th April 1948. It now has a staff over over 7,000 people, and works in over 150 countries. It states, as its primary role, to direct and coordinate international health within the United Nation's system.

It is, of course, dominated by the conventional medical establishment.

So what does WHO believe to be causing the epidemic of cancer? They have written a fact sheet, dated February 2015, which outline their views. First, they outline the size of the current problem.
  • "Cancers figure among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, with approximately 14 million new cases and 8.2 million cancer related deaths in 2012."
  • "The number of new cases is expected to rise by about 70% over the next 2 decades.
  • "Among men, the 5 most common sites of cancer diagnosed in 2012 were lung, prostate, colorectum, stomach, and liver cancer.
  • "Among women the 5 most common sites diagnosed were breast, colorectum, lung, cervix, and stomach cancer.
The fact sheet says that cancer is now a leading cause of death worldwide "accounting for 8.2 million deaths in 2012." They give the following figures for the most common causes of cancer death:
  • lung (1.59 million deaths)
  • liver (745 000 deaths)
  • stomach (723 000 deaths)
  • colorectal (694 000 deaths)
  • breast (521 000 deaths)
  • oesophageal cancer (400 000 deaths)
As far as causation is concern, WHO outlines 5 behavioural and dietary risks contributing, they say, to about one-third of cancer deaths:
  1. High body mass index (overweight, obesity)
  2. Low fruit and vegetable intake (diet)
  3. Lack of physical activity (exercise)
  4. Tobacco use (20% of global cancer deaths, 70% of lung cancer deaths)
  5. Alcohol use.
They go on to say that cancer-causing viral infections are responsible for up to 20% of cancer deaths in low- and middle-income countries). In particular, they point to the Hepatitis B (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV) and some types of Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) which, they say, increase the risk for liver and cervical cancer respectively.

They also talk about other factors, including:
  • physical carcinogens, such as ultraviolet and ionizing radiation;
  • chemical carcinogens, such as asbestos, components of tobacco smoke, aflatoxin (a food contaminant) and arsenic (a drinking water contaminant);
  • biological carcinogens, such as infections from certain viruses, bacteria or parasites.
WHO also mentions that age is a factor, that "the incidence of cancer rises dramatically with age, most likely due to a build up of risks for specific cancers that increase with age. The overall risk accumulation is combined with the tendency for cellular repair mechanisms to be less effective as a person grows older."

Yet there is not a single mention of pharmaceutical drugs. 

Not a single one! 

Even though drugs and vaccines are a known cause of cancer!

What does this demonstrate? It shows clearly that WHO are not independent of the influence of the  powerful Pharmaceutical companies. The omission shows that WHO is merely passing on the message of the drug companies. It would appear, they are not at liberty to mention that the use of conventional drugs and vaccines are a known, indeed an accepted cause of cancer.

The WHO Fact Sheet then goes on to consider 'modifying and avoiding the risk factors', and talks about 'prevention strategies'. We can, they say, stop smoking, lose weight, eat a healthier diet, exercise more, drink less alcohol, avoid air pollution.

Of course we can! And if we were told, openly and honestly about the cancer-inducing properties of so many pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, we could avoid these too!

But we are not being told about this! Yet avoiding conventional medical treatments, for other illnesses and diseases, and instead looking for safer alternative medical treatments that have no such 'side effects', would be equally wise! WHO then goes on to explain their (worthy) motives and objectives.

          "In 2013, WHO launched the Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases 2013-2020 that aims to reduce by 25% premature mortality from cancer, cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases by 2025. Some of the voluntary targets are most relevant for cancer prevention, including target 5 aimed at reducing the prevalence of tobacco use by 30%."

Perhaps so. Yet if WHO, alongside our Governments, our Media, and our doctors, were to openly and honestly tell us that one significant cause of cancer were pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, these objectives might be more easily achieved.