With conventional in serious trouble, mainly due to its lack of safety and effectiveness, and the serious side effects (illnesses and diseases) caused by its pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, it seeks to use any argument it can find to justify itself.
Recently I saw an answer to a question of the Quora website which claimed that all conventional medical treatment for cancer were 'natural' treatments. This is how thes claim was justified.
Recently I saw an answer to a question of the Quora website which claimed that all conventional medical treatment for cancer were 'natural' treatments. This is how thes claim was justified.
- Chemotherapy uses chemicals found in nature.
- Radiotherapy uses radioactive isotopes found in nature.
- Surgery uses knives made from metals found in nature.
- Drugs also contain chemicals found in nature.
The writer went on to say that there were two main differences between these 'natural' treatments, and "the so-called 'natural treatments' offered by natural medical therapies like homeopathy, (i) conventional treatments had been tested, and (ii) they worked. The answer concluded by saying .
"If you want to die in agony, by all means. waste your money on some shit off the internet. Meanwhile, us sensible folks will stick with science."
So let's ignore the name calling and gratuitous hostility and address the question - what is natural medicine? I use the term 'natural medicine' to distinguish homeopathy, naturopathy, acupuncture, herbalism, et al, from conventional medicine, and the definition is actually quite simple.
All natural medical therapies work on the basis that the only means of curing illness, and maintaining health, is to work alongside and in harmony with the body's own self-healing mechanisms.
Chemotherapy may use chemicals found in nature. Radiotherapy may use radioactive isotopes found in nature. The surgeon's knives might be found in nature. And pharmaceutical drugs may contain chemicals found in nature. BUT AS SURE AS HELL THEY DON'T BELONG IN TO THE HUMAN BODY!
Indeed, the chemicals and isotopes used by conventional medicine may well have been 'scientifically' tested, but despite this testing they still cause serious patient harm. And the evidence of the serious harm they cause is clearly spelt out in the doctor's own medical literature in BNF, in MIMS, in Patient Information Leaflets, et al.
And also in the medical literature is data about incidence of cancer. Cancer rates have risen exponentially alongside the increased consumption of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. Moreover, cancer is no longer as disease associated with ageing and older people, it is now a disease that is increasingly affecting middle aged people, children, and even young babies.
One cause of this epidemic level of cancer is the cavalier attitude towards poisonous substances that this doctor, and the conventional medical establishment as a whole, makes about them. There are a host of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that are known to cause cancer. So, in large measure, it is conventional medicine that has brought us to this dreadful situation. Anyone who wants to avoid cancer can take a huge step towards doing so by refusing to take pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that are known to cause the disease.
But then for this doctor to argue that chemotherapy, radiotherapy and pharmaceutical drugs are 'natural' treatments is totally bizarre. It demonstrates just how desperate conventional medicine is becoming to save their dominant role in health provision.
So let's ignore the name calling and gratuitous hostility and address the question - what is natural medicine? I use the term 'natural medicine' to distinguish homeopathy, naturopathy, acupuncture, herbalism, et al, from conventional medicine, and the definition is actually quite simple.
All natural medical therapies work on the basis that the only means of curing illness, and maintaining health, is to work alongside and in harmony with the body's own self-healing mechanisms.
Chemotherapy may use chemicals found in nature. Radiotherapy may use radioactive isotopes found in nature. The surgeon's knives might be found in nature. And pharmaceutical drugs may contain chemicals found in nature. BUT AS SURE AS HELL THEY DON'T BELONG IN TO THE HUMAN BODY!
Indeed, the chemicals and isotopes used by conventional medicine may well have been 'scientifically' tested, but despite this testing they still cause serious patient harm. And the evidence of the serious harm they cause is clearly spelt out in the doctor's own medical literature in BNF, in MIMS, in Patient Information Leaflets, et al.
And also in the medical literature is data about incidence of cancer. Cancer rates have risen exponentially alongside the increased consumption of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. Moreover, cancer is no longer as disease associated with ageing and older people, it is now a disease that is increasingly affecting middle aged people, children, and even young babies.
One cause of this epidemic level of cancer is the cavalier attitude towards poisonous substances that this doctor, and the conventional medical establishment as a whole, makes about them. There are a host of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that are known to cause cancer. So, in large measure, it is conventional medicine that has brought us to this dreadful situation. Anyone who wants to avoid cancer can take a huge step towards doing so by refusing to take pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that are known to cause the disease.
But then for this doctor to argue that chemotherapy, radiotherapy and pharmaceutical drugs are 'natural' treatments is totally bizarre. It demonstrates just how desperate conventional medicine is becoming to save their dominant role in health provision.
