Homeopathy - Safe Medicine

Failure ConMed (12) Statins: those nice, safe drugs!

2012-02-10T14:39:00.002Z

Statin drugs are supposed to be safe. This is what we have been hearing about them now for many years. They were first introduced in 1987, and quickly became a blockbuster drug. One Statin drug, Baycol, caused over 50 deaths, and was linked to over 1000 cases of muscle weakness. It was quickly (and silently) withdrawn.

Soon, Big Pharma propaganda had convinced us that these drugs were entirely safe. The magazine 'What Doctors Don't Tell You', WDDTY, in January 2007 observed that 'everyone seems to be popping a cholesterold-lowering statin drug these days. They have become part of the daily health regime for millions of people, and they are considered to be so safe that one statin, Simvastatin, is available over-the-counter in the UK without a prescription".

And as late as May 2008, the Independent was able to publish an article - 'Prescribing more Statins could save lives'. The article reported that, in 2007, Professor Roger Boyle, the Government's 'heart tsar' had suggested that every man over 50, and every woman over 60, could be offered a daily Statin to reduce their heart attack risk. It also reported that NICE (the National Institute for Clinical Evidence) was advising that all adults aged 40 to 75 should be assessed for their risk of heart disease - and should be offered Statin drugs.

These were incredible, but quite typical claims that have been made for Statin drugs for over 25 years now. But by the time this article was published the dangers of Statins were known, but well hidden from view. I have copies of WDDTY going back to the early 2000s - and they were regularly reporting on the dangers of Statins - all studiously avoiding by the mainstream media, Big Pharma, the Government, the NHS, and our own GPs.

The Health Sciences Institute has also been saying for years that Statins are unsafe. Indeed, as they say, the known disease-inducing effects (DIEs) of these drugs now include liver damage, acute kidney failure, memory loss, Alzheimer's disease, cancer, muscle weakness (including a condition, rhabdomyolysis, that can be fatal), fatigue, depression, type 2 diabetes and cataracts.

There is now considerable, if not overwhelming evidence, pointing to the dangers of Statin drugs. Indeed there is much more evidence than even I had imagined when I began researching for this blog. This article is perhaps the most useful link - as it provides links to a considerable number of scientific studies that points to the dangers of Statins - from peripheral neuropathy and poly-neuropathy, to neuro-toxicity, to psychiatric reactions, to cognitive function, memory loss, mental effects, to Alzheimers disease, and much more.

One of the most recent connection has been with diabetes. Statin drugs has been found to increase the risk of diabetes in post-menopausal women by a massive 70%. A long-term study in the USA, involving 1000's of women, found that female patients prescribed Statins had 48% greater change of developing diabetes. And this rose to 70% in older women. There is more on this research here. And the research is outlined here.

Equally important, Statin drugs is implicated with many kinds of nerve damage. There is now research evidence indicating that if you take Statin drugs for 2 years or more, nerve damage becomes the rule rather than the exception. An amazing claim indeed.

EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE DANGERS OF HIGH CHOLESTEROL
Yet, to understand the full enormity of the Statin drug scam, we also have to understand about cholesterol, and whether it is (as we have been told) an important contributory cause of heart disease. Remember, the main reason for people taking Statins is that we have been convinced that high levels of cholesterol cause heart disease. Yet there is a major clue that this link may be quite wrong, namely, that as cholesterol levels have become lower, rates of heart disease have not followed suit.

” … between 1994 and 2006 the percentage of men aged 65 to 74 with ‘high’ cholesterol decreased from 87% to 54% … Despite this, the rate of coronary heart disease for this age group stayed about the same … Other age groups have experienced an increase in the rate of heart disease as the number of people with ‘high’ cholesterol has decreased.”

The Big Pharma companies do, of course, have good reason to invent and/or support such a link. Indeed, as this article explains, there are about $29Billion Reasons to lie about cholesterol!

The evidence linking high cholesterol with heart disease is, at best, tenuous. And where there is a problem, it is probably best to deal with it is through diet rather than drugs!

SO WHAT ARE WE TOLD ABOUT THE DANGERS OF STATINS?
There is a deafening silence about the dangers of Statin drugs. The research outlined in this blog is rarely, if ever, reported in the mainstream Media. They appear content going along with the views of the conventional medical establishment, and the drug companies. So as patients we are not told anything beyond a few bland and understated cautions, and the mantra that 'the benefits outweigh the disadvantages'.

The information is not even found on websites selling these drugs, or indeed, in the information contained within the packaging. One study, undertaken by the school of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences (University of Portsmouth), and reported by HRI, asked this question, and discovered the following:

* General contraindications regarding statin use were absent in more that 92% of website advertising Statins.

* Contraindications relating to interactions with other medication were absent in over 47% of websites.

* Warnings about the potential for muscle damage were absent in 37% of websites

* Warnings about the potential for liver damage were absent in almost 50% of website.

The conclusion HRI reached, after looking at this research, was that it was impossible for consumers to make 'informed choices' about the likely benefits and harms of these drugs. Their dedicated blog, 'The Cholesterol Truth', believes that 'statin drugs are nothing but money-spinning concoctions that are putting people's health at risk'. It is difficult to disagree with this summary. They say, further:

"It's ridiculous to think doctors are prescribing drugs that are supposedly preventing a killer disease ... but in turn these drugs also increase the risk of another major disease - diabetes. It's hardly surprising that the number of people being diagnosed with diabetes is reacing epidemic proportions given the widespread use of statins.

Yet this is what we get with all Big Pharma drugs. We take them for one condition, only to find that we soon go done with another disease, often much worse than the original disease.

Big Pharma companies, supported by the Media, politicians and the NHS, continue to push Statin drugs quite shamelessly. This article describes the idea that they should be prescribed for the treatment of flu - something that is described as 'a ludicrous recommendation'.

Quite so. But perhaps recommending Statin drugs to treat any condition is equally ludicrous!

Homeopathy defends itself from vested commercial interests

2012-02-09T14:24:00.001Z

Wherever homeopathy is practiced, and it is now practised throughout the world, it is coming under attack. But where the commercial interests of the Conventional Medical Establishment (CME), led by Big Pharma, are strongest, the attacks are strongest. In the UK, anti-homeopathy rhetoric takes many forms:

* Attacks on the scientific evidence base for homeopathy, which is now quite extensive, and increasing.
* Attacks on the evidence of its effectiveness in dealing with sick people, which is now huge.
* Attacks on university course that seek to teach homeopathy.
* Attacks on the ability of homeopaths to advertise what they do.
* Attacks on the handful of homeopathic hospitals in the UK.
* Attacks on homeopathy via the mainstream media, without being given the opportunity to respond.

It is clear that CME, and the Big Pharma companies, just don't want you to know how effective, how safe, and how inexpensive homeopathy is!

Dr Brian Kaplan defends homeopathy in this video - although it is probably true that homeopathy needs defending only against one thing - ignorance!

Certainly, if it was left to patients to determine the medical treatment they wanted, the growth of homeopathy would be even more rapid. This is why Dr Andrew Sikorski, in this article, argues that there should be more public consultation about homeopathy and 'complementary' therapies. Of course, CME will not permit this as they realise not only the ConMed is failing (see series of blogs on this website), but that homeopathy is gaining in popularity.

When people are asked about homeopathy, they are usually impressed. This article covers several situations in which this has been done in recent years. The experience of the Bristol Homeopathic Hospital, described here, is important - because this hospital is now facing two local Primary Care Trust who have unilaterally, and without consultation, decided to refuse to refer patients here anymore. So much for the Government's policy of 'Patient Choice', and the idea that there should be 'do decision about me without me'!

Yet despite the best efforts of CME to undermine it, homeopathy continues to thrive, with increasing numbers of people moving away from drug-based medicine to homeopathy, and other safer, more effective medical therapies.

These figures, from the USA, the home of the largest Big Pharma companies, demonstrate something of this increase in popularity.

And in response to attacks on Australian universities, which offer courses on CAM therapies, this professor states that 80% of people in Australia are seeking alternative treatments.

And no wonder. This Canadian article suggests that some 70% of patients using homeopathy 'experienced improvement'. Most homeopaths I have met have suggested the same sort of percentage - something I suspect the CME would die for!

And it is not just humans that can discover the benefits of homeopathy - animals too respond well. Indeed, as this article states, many vets are now turning to homeopathy.

And again, no wonder. Antibiotics are now failing on our farms. And homeopathy is now being put forward as a safer (for animals, and meat consumers), more effective replacement to them. And see here too.

The time for homeopathy is coming. There is nothing in homeopathy, our detractors often tell us. But there very definitely is something, and something very important, in homeopathy - and despite being under constant attack, more and more people are finding out for themselves! Perhaps the attacks draw attention to us. After all, there is no such thing as bad publicity!

WAWWE (7) Monsanto. The worst company in the world?

2012-02-03T14:27:00.000Z

The way that we produce the food we eat is vital. During the last 100 years, or so, food production on our farms have changed. And the result is that we can no longer trust the quality, or even the safety of the food we are being offered by the Big Food companies. It is not just a matter of pesticides and herbicides, the factory farming of animals, the intensification of agriculture, the depletion of our soils - it is about the very seeds we plant. And at the centre of this controversy is the giant biotech company, Monsanto.

Monsanto were named 'the worst company of 2011' by the organisation 'Natural Society'. The won this accolade for "threatening human health and the environment". No mean achievement! Why is this? Monsanto has not only created some of the most dangerous products, such as Agent Orange, dioxin, and recombinant bovine growth hormone, it is now at the very centre of the GMO seed row.

In a recent email communication with supporters, the Organic Consumers Association, they said that "energy-intensive industrial farming practices, that rely on toxic chemicals and genetically engineered crop are not just undermining public health, they're destroying the planet". They give 10 reasons for this contention:

#1 Generating Massive Greenhouse Gas Pollution (CO2, Methane, Nitrous Oxide) and Global Warming, While Promoting False Solutions Such as Industrial Biofuels, So-Called Drought-Resistant Crops, and Genetically Engineered Trees

#2 Polluting the Environment and the Soil-Food Web with Pesticides, Chemical Fertilizers, and Persistent Toxins, Including Dioxin

#3 Draining and Polluting Wetlands and Aquifers, Turning Farmland into Desert

#4 Poisoning Wells and Municipal Drinking Water, Lakes, and Rivers

#5 Chopping Down the Rainforests for Monoculture GMO Crops, Biofuels and Cattle Grazing

#6 Increasing the Cost of Food, While Reducing Nutrition and Biodiversity

#7 Spawning Pesticide-Resistant Superbugs and Weeds, and Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria

#8 Generating New and More Virulent Plant, Animal and Human Diseases

#9 Utilizing Wasteful Fossil Fuel-Intensive Practices and Encouraging the Expansion of Natural Gas Fracking and Tar Sands Extraction (Which Destroy Forests, Aquifers, and Farmland)

#10 Stealing Money From the 99% to Give Huge Subsidies to the 1% Wealthiest, Most Chemical and Energy-Intensive Farms and Food Producers

It is now estimated that 90% of some US crops are genetically modified, and that most food eaten in the USA contain some GMO ingredients.

The position is not quite so serious in Europe, with countries like Hungary and Germany banning it. Even in the UK we have recently seen some success, with Monsanto withdrawing its Cambridge-based wheat production unit because of consumer resistance.

Monsanto has based its propaganda on a number of promises that have not been met. This 'Global Citizens Report' states that genetic engineering has not increased the yield of a single crop. That instead of controlling weeds and pests GM crops (alongside Monsanto's herbicide, Roundup) have led to the emergence of super-weeds and super-pests. That instead of reducing the amounts of chemicals used in growing crops, they require more. That promises to produce 'drought resistant' crops have not materialised. And so on.

And it also report that "there are enough independent studies to show the GE foods can cause severe health damage".

Part of the problem is the increased use of herbicides, that persist in the soil, leave a residue in GM food, and so go on to poison us when we eat them. The problems of herbicide use are discussed in some detail in this article. And this article explains how these poisons also pollutes our water supply, so that even if we avoid eating GM foods, our water supply, taken from the taps in our homes, can also be making us ill, or even killing us, slowly.

So is Monsanto concerned? It would appear not, as they have stated "there is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans". We must all, therefore, ask the question. Is the development of GMO crops, and Monsanto's position on testing them, in the best interests of our health - or is it to protect their profits?

The same article outlines the health dangers known to arise, namely, that DNA in GM crops are responsible for disease-causing inflammation, and auto-immune disorders.

And this may not be the end of Monsanto's aims and objectives for our future, and the future of our environment. This article suggests that they want to kill our bees in order to make way for its 'super-bee'. Far-fetched? Well, someone or something is certainly killing our bees! And the use of pesticides and herbicides are already deeply implicated.

We have to increase our efforts to boycott GMO crops, and the food made from it. But in doing so, there are two things that stand in our way. The first is that Big Food, and Monsanto in particular, don't want us to know when we are eating GMOs. So food labelling is being opposed. No one has asked for GMO food; no one wants it; and so labels will help us to avoid it if we wish to do so. So surely our politicians will help us?

Well, not necessarily. The second problem is the financial influence and power of Monsanto, who are lobbying our politicians with all the money they have available to them!. The question is, will our politicians support us? Or Monsanto?

But to end on a more positive note. In a David vs Goliath (Monsanto) court battle in Canada, one farmer actually won! Worth a read. The moral of this story is that we all, each one of us, have to fight this evil giant. And the good news is that 270,000 organic farmers are going to sue Monsanto. We should all wish them good luck!

Failure of ConMed (11). HPV Vaccination? Gardasil and Cervarix.

2012-02-02T15:10:00.002Z

Big Pharma vaccines are dangerous. My last blog in the series focused on articles covering many types of vaccines. This one focuses on just one: the HPV vaccines (Gardasil and Cervarix); those given to pubescent girls, allegedly to 'prevent cervical cancer'. I am not sure whether these vaccines are just more dangerous that others, or if the damage they cause is more noticeable or apparent in young people rather than with babies and young children. But the evidence against them is now quite immense - although, as usual, the evidence does not get through the censorship exercise in the mainstream media!

There has always been concern about what the evidence, and the quality of evidence, that supports giving this vaccine. This article goes over the paucity of the evidence, both for its efficacy (does it, or will it, do what it says it will do); and is it safe.

So what damage has the HPV/Gardasil/Cervarix vaccines caused?

This articles states that 'at least' 12 schoolgirls in New York have been damaged by a 'mystery illnesses'. The mystery illness is Tourette's Syndrome. And, of course, only to those who don't wish to acknowledge the most likely cause of this condition are really mystified!

This important article outlines the damage done to 213 women who have suffered permanent disability after having the vaccine. The article states that the vaccine is known to cause paralysis, and MS-type symptoms, as well as seizures, blindness, and many other conditions. It goes into some of the detail about the problems being caused by the vaccines, and includes individual videos of young girls whose lives have been devastated by it. It also asks, pertinently, whether some deaths have caused by the vaccine, but explained away as 'a coincidence'.

This VacTruth article does suggest that this vaccine is 'killing us softly'. It states that there is no HPV crisis, that HPV does not lead to cancer, that the vaccine does not prevent cancer - and much else.

Rarely does the mainstream media bother to report the dangers of these vaccines. With perhaps this exception, the tragic story of a 13 year old girl put into a 'waking coma' after receiving the vaccine; the article appeared in the Sun; and here in the mirror. But isolated appearances such as this give the unfortunate impression that these are 'isolated' incidents, and not as common as they are.

The fact is that these vaccines can destroy the lives of young people, and cause devastation within families, when healthy young people are involved in vaccine-induced tragedy. These mums have expressed their views about their damaged children - after a bland (but typical) statement was issued about the 'excellent safety record' of Gardasil.

Yet even Medical Journals, so often quiet in matters concerned the the dangers of drugs and vaccines, are now raising questions about HPV vaccines. This article goes into the questions being asked about the adequacy of testing prior to the vaccines being used, and the ethics behind the testing. However, there appears to be no suggestion that their licenses should be withdrawn!

This article tells the same story - that HPV vaccines are unproven, ineffective, and lack evidence. The article states that:

the latest Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. VAERS statistics clearly show that HPV Vaccines, Gardasil and Cervarix, have been associated with 22, 619 adverse reactions; 8,926 of those reports requiring emergency hospitalization; and 4,616 cases where the victim did not recover. Death reports stand at 102.

The first State in the USA to use the Gardasil vaccine is now beginning to withdraw it. But this is the exception. Throughout the world, governments and politicians seem to positively, and sometimes aggressively, sanctioning this vaccine. This article also includes data about the vaccines:

VAERS data show that Gardasil has been associated with 24,184 adverse effects since its debut in June of 2006, including seizures, anaphylaxis, paralysis, transverse myelitis, Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS), acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM), opsoclonus-myoclonus syndrome (uncontrollable movement of the eyes back and forth and jerking movements of the extremities), brachial neuritis, loss of vision, postural tachycardia syndrome, facial palsy, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, chronic fatigue syndrome, blindness, pancreatitis, speech problems, short term memory loss, miscarriage, multiple sclerosis, autoimmune disorders, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, abnormal Pap smears and even cervical cancer.[24][25][26]

Yes, you read that correctly – VAERS reports 41 cases of cervical cancer following vaccination with Gardasil!

With all this vaccine-induced mayhem, Sanevax is now calling for approval to be withdrawn - because of the lack of post-licensing monitoring. In other words, there has not been adequate oversight into wht is happening to the young people who receive this vaccine. And in another letter, Sanevax is calling for educators to monitor the dangers of this vaccine - perhaps because, in many (too many) cases, schools and teachers are being used by health authorities to promote it, and even to enforce it.

And now, in some parts of the world, the drug companies are trying to persuade us that boys, and well as girls, need this vaccine! I wonder, is this to prevent boys getting cervical cancer? Or is it more to do with boasting Big Pharma profits? The 'debate' can also be found in this Dr Mercola article.

So will the boys fare any better than the girls? It does not appear that they will, with these 4 deaths already being reported. See here also for more information on this.

The silence of the ConMed Establishment, and the mainstream media about the dangers of vaccines, displays the usual lack of honesty and openness regarding drug and vaccine dangers, and health matters generally. This means that most people do not know, or understand what they are agreeing to, when they are vaccinated, or they agree to their children being vaccinated. The article emphasises this, and gives another example of a young girl, damaged by the HPV vaccine.

But at least one brave doctor, in Austria, has spoken out. The message is the same though. The vaccine is dangerous, and completely useless in preventing cancer. And a group of doctors in France have also stated that the vaccine should be de-listed and suspended because of the dangers.

So how do we protect our young girls from this dangerous vaccine? This article discusses the problem, suggesting that we tell them, quite simply, that the vaccine is neither necessary or effective!

And there are signs that the Big Pharma companies, who see vaccines as a way of earning vast profits, are at last being taken to task. Litigation in the USA is already underway.

And even some politicians are finding the issues difficult; not least when their campaign funds are made up of Big Pharma donations.

We need to protect our children from vaccines, and the HPV vaccine in particular. Recently, the UK government decided to give Gardasil rather than Cervarix. I am not entirely sure why this decision was taken. If there were 'outcome problems' with Cervarix, then a move to Gardasil (on which there is much more evidence of harm) seems to be a triumph of hope over experience!

Neither vaccine in safe. And both should be avoided.

More Big Pharma cuts

2012-02-02T11:19:00.000Z

It has been announced today that AstraZenica, the giant Anglo-Swedish pharmaceutical company, is to cut 7,300 jobs throughout the world, including in the UK, where it employs 8,000 people. This is part of a continuing trend. Between 2007 and 2009 the company lost over 12,000 jobs. The current programme of cuts, which began in 2010, sees over 9,000 jobs being lost.

All Big Pharma companies are now contracting rapidly. Profits are still huge, but they are falling. There has to be concern and sympathy for all those people who are going to lose their jobs. And, of course, this contraction of the industry is seen my many to be damaging to the UK economy.

Yet in terms of health, it represents the beginning of the end for conventional, drug-based medicine (ConMed). AstraZeneca have admitted that it is losing patients - to competition - and they expect their losses to continue. In reality, their drugs are either coming to the end of their patents (and so are less profitable), or they are failing because they have been found to be either ineffective, dangerous, or both. And they have no new 'wonder' drugs coming through.

Yet the problem for the Big Pharma companies is doubly serious. The 100-year-plus belief that 'science' would ultimately solve the problem of health is certainly in tatters, with little prospect of it being revived. But in addition, as the profitability of Big Pharma decline, and their industrial and commercial power declines alongside, especially to countries such as the UK, so to will the influence that ConMed will have on Government health policy, in the 'monopolistic' commissioning arms of the NHS, and even in editorial censorship that exists within the mainstream media on matters of health.

What this means is that as Big Pharma companies decline, their ability to buy influence and power, and to dominate national health services, will also decline in the future.

A more rational health debate might become possible, a situation is which the variety of medical therapies will be allowed to demonstrate their worth to patients on the basis of their efficacy, effectiveness and safety - and not on the basis of political and industrial muscle.

A case of Hidradenitis Suppurativa

2012-01-30T17:04:00.000Z

CA is 43 years old, and she had suffered from Hidradenitis Suppurativa (HS), mainly in her groin area, for over 15 years. During that time she had a multiplicity of conventional treatment, including several operations to remove the lesions, a hysterectomy, and she said she had taken innumerable doses of anti-biotics. But nothing that conventional medicine did made the condition any better. Indeed, by the winter of 2010, CA said that she was worse than she has ever been.

HS is a chronic skin condition which appears primarily on the arm-pits, breasts, and groin. It is an inflammatory condition of the sweat glands, and the lesions are often deep-seated, and very painful nodules.

The hospital had told her there was no other treatment that they could offer her. And when she asked her GP for a referral to a homeopath she was refused (as normally happens in 'our' drug-oriented NHS).

So on a bitterly cold December day, in 2010, just over a year ago, CA came to see me, and we began the voyage to recovery. One year later, in December 2011, CA wrote this to me in an email.

"Isn't it fantastic that my body is learning how to deal with the hidradenitis! I'm over the moon".

What had caused this dramatic cure? The homeopathic remedy Elaps Corallinus, with a little help from Medhorrinum, a homeopathic nosode, and initially, some Penicillinum, to counter some of the anti-biotics she had taken over the years.

Why this remedy? First, the remedy has been used successfully for this condition before. Second, CA's physical symptoms matched closely with the remedy description. But most important, CA told me during our discussion that "she liked her own company, liked isolation, and felt she was 'forced' to live in society". This matched descriptions of Elaps, the the Homeopathic Materia Medica - that people who needed the remedy had 'a desire for solitude'. When there is a close match between both physical and emotional symptoms, I have found that the remedy is usually successful.

And Elaps worked well from the beginning, although for a time it never cleared the condition completely, or prevented a series of 'relapses'. After all, this condition was 15 years old, and was by this time well established. It was not going to disappear overnight - not even with the power of homeopathy! We had to play around a little with potency; I thought she would respond best to high potency but she was best on repeated low-to-moderate potencies. Then, sometimes, the remedy did not work as well as we expected; something seemed to be 'getting in the way' - hence the use of one of the major miasmatic nosodes, Medhorrinum, to clear the path to allow Elaps to work better.

And gradually, the remedy did work. New lesions did not grow so big; they were not so painful, and they did not re-occur so regularly. Each time there was a relapse I asked CA to take either Medhorrinum or Elaps.

And then, eventually, there was CA's comment - which came after my suggestion that she should see, with the next relapse, whether her body had learnt to correct itself without a remedy.

As a case example, this is not remarkable or even unusual. Homeopathy works powerfully once the 'correct'. closely matching remedy has been found. Yet many questions arise from it.

* Why did conventional medicine treat her for 15 years - entirely without success?

* Why did the NHS not refer CA to other medical therapies and treatments, even when she asked for this to be done?

* Why did the NHS refuse to pay for CA's treatment, especially when they had nothing else to offer her, and told her so?

Certainly, the NHS has failed CA. The blind commitment of the NHS to one type of medicine, even when that treatment does not work for 15 years, is a clear demonstration that the NHS has been taken over by a medical elite that have formed a medical monopoly.

Moreover, it has created a medical monopoly that prefers patients to suffer rather than to open itself up to other medical therapies.

Failure of ConMed (10). Just how dangerous are Big Pharma vaccines?

2012-01-24T13:10:00.001Z

There is now so much evidence building up against vaccines it is almost impossible to keep up with them! And it must be extremely difficult for the mainstream media to continue ignoring the evidence - although they seem to manage doing so quite well. And the Government, the NHS, and our doctors seem to continue denying this information too.

There follows a long list of articles. So have a look at each of them, and tell your friends. Regrettably, it is the only way they are likely to find out!

The author here states that vaccines cause disease, are ineffective, and increase susceptibility to disease.

In contrast, children who are not vaccinated are much healthier.

Fewer vaccines leads to reduced infant mortality.

Are vaccines laced with birth control drugs?

Does Big Pharma want to impose vaccines on children without parental consent?

Indictment of vaccine researchers; questions about the veracity of vaccine research, and what we are told about them.

Should paediatricians see unvaccinated children? Is this more evidence of forced medication?

The attitude of some doctors towards vaccines. Doctors in the know protecting their own?

Doctors speak out.

And more GP doubts.

Medical workers generally skeptical about vaccines. Why shouldn't they be - they see the awful outcomes!

And this despite being urged by their own journals to get vaccinated. Only 38% of GP's, who tell us to get vaccinated, take their own medicine!

Perhaps they know about the ingredients of vaccines! And they inject this stuff into our blood supply!

Big Pharma are pushing 20 new vaccines. I wonder if they know dangers yet; and if so, whether they will bother to tell us?

New evidence linking Autism with Vaccines.

And more on Autism and Vaccines.

Flu vaccine banned. But are we told? They don't think we should know!

MMR Vaccines; and the dreadful damage they can cause to children.

And more on MMR. From the aptly named 'What doctors don't tell you' magazine.

And measles caught by children who have had measles vaccines anyway!

Whooping cough - caused by whooping cough vaccine!

Yet whooping cough vaccine made compulsory!

Vaccines causing ill-health?

Hepatitis B Vaccine - an experiment? Call for a moritorium!

Gardasil (Cervarix)

Gardasil vaccine hoax? Watch this video.

The hidden truth about Gardasil vaccines

People are increasingly realising that vaccines are not safe. So why not join up with the Vaccine Resistance Movement? Most people don't have this information; so they vaccinate themselves, and/or their children without understanding the possible consequences. Everyone needs to do their bit in getting this information across. It seems certain that the popular media is refusing to do so.

Humphry Davy - a comment on Homeopathy Denialists?

2012-01-18T15:46:00.000Z

“Nothing is so dangerous to the progress of the human mind than to assume that our views of science are ultimate, that there are no mysteries in nature, that our triumphs are complete and that there are no new worlds to conquer.”

― Humphry Davy

Improvements continue with Homeopathy

2012-01-18T15:38:00.001Z

On 4th January I published a story sent to me by Noor Muhammad Khan (DIHom), a touching story about his mother, who suffered with arthritis, for which 5 years of conventional medication had done little, or nothing.

http://safe-medicine.blogspot.com/2012/01/joy-of-discovering-homeopathy.html

I am pleased to say that her progress continues - as this update from Noor indicates:

It has been 12 days since my mother is on *Rhus Toxidenderon 6 C* 5 drops. Her present condition is as follows:

1: She had persistant itching in ears and discharge which is quite better.
2: She had toothaches which are quite better.
3: Her cough was quite fine but for two days she has some episodes of cough.
4: Pain in between her shoulders and upper limbs are better.
5: She still has pain in legs.
6: She had itching in both eyes which are better and tears fall just from one eye now.

She has stopped using Allopathic drugs for allergy, cough. She is taking pain killer just once a day (NSAID Group). Before she used it twice.

The thing to notice here is that progress is not just with the patients' main condition - arthritis - but several other conditions that, in conventional medical terms, would be considered to be 'unrelated'.

The moral of this update is simple. Get the right remedy - and general health tends to improve.

In my early days as a homeopath, I remember treating one woman for menstrual problems. When I saw her for a second appointment she reported that she was much better - and wondered if I had given her something to improve the 'split ends' on her hair. She had not mentioned them!

The joys and wonders of homeopathy at work!

Failure of ConMed (10). Just how dangerous are Big Pharma drugs?

2012-01-13T17:30:00.001Z

Evidence for the failure of drug-based conventional medicine (ConMed) comes through thick and fast. The evidence is rarely used in the mainstream media; so pass this blog on to all your friends and family. It may save them from the dangers of the Big Pharma drugs we are regularly told are 'safe' and 'effective' when in fact they are neither.

Indeed, the question can be asked - just what do doctors and GPs know about the dangers of the drug they give us?

Aspirin in one of the oldest ConMed drugs. So look at this advice now being given to GPs. The benefits of Aspirin are heavily outweighed by the dangers! Has you doctor ever told you this before? Have you heard about it in the media? And if they can't get it right about one of the oldest drugs, used for years, how can they possible get it right about newer drugs. And in this the message is reinforced; the value of Aspirin in more in the spin than the science!

And some painkillers are now known to kill over 15,000 people each year - just in the USA

The answer is, of course, that they don't know. Conventional medicine gives us drugs but in reality have no idea what they might be doing to us. We patients appear to be one huge drug trial! Here are some more examples.

Antidepressants. They cause suicide and violence.
And mums who take them risk giving babies high blood pressure.
And Canadian Judge says they can cause children to commit murder.

Antibiotics. The links with Obesity, Diabetes and Stroke. How long have we been told these drugs are entirely safe!

BigPharma drugs to prevent abnormal heart rhythms actually cause them!

Is the epidemic rise in Alzheimers Disease, and Dementia caused by drugs? Well, a common 'side-effect' of many, many drugs is - confusion. See this article, published in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, about 'common' drugs that cause memory disorders.

Statin Drugs. These dreadful drugs are now thought to cause diabetes! Once, not so very long ago, we were told these drug were 'entirely safe'. They are not! Look here for further information on this.

Not even doctors, our own GPs appear to know about the dangers of drugs. Here, they complain about being kept in the dark about the dangers of Viagra. Some time earlier, doctors were told that Viagra should not be taken more than twice and month. Makes you wonder just how dangerous they are!

So perhaps, when doctors are accused of, and sued for creating Valium addicts, they were not aware of the problem because they were not told(?)

Perhaps you will have noticed that I have said nothing about the dreadfulness, and the horrors of vaccination. Why? Because there is just so much coming out about how dangerous they are, and the devastation they are causing. So this will be the theme next week.

Homeopathy Healthy Medicine

2012-01-13T14:59:00.000Z

This article first appeared at

http://arh.blogspot.com/2012/01/healthy-medicine-8-more-evidence-for.html

In my last blog in this series, there were a couple of responses indicating that homeopathy had not been able to prove itself over the last 200 years. This is utter nonsense! Homeopathy is a form of medicine that has never been subsidised, as conventional medicine is now subsidised by the NHS. People use it because it is safe, and effective. And as patients have had to pay for it, another advantage is that it is inexpensive too.

See, for example, this article that covers a brief history of homeopathy in the treatment, and prevention, of acute diseases like Scarlet Fever, Cholera, Diphtheria, and Malaria.

For those of you who are new to homeopathy, here is an excellent description of homeopathy, and how it differs from conventional medicine. For anyone who worries about the drug-based medicine that dominates the NHS, this is well worth reading.
Indeed, as this article suggests, homeopathy is the natural way to treat both body and spirit.

And so, in order to demonstrate the kind of conditions it can treat, here is a small collection of articles that can be found on the internet. Have a look at them - and decide if homeopathy is for you.

The treatment of Influenza with homeopathy. Or alternatively, look at this article. Or this one for the prevention of colds and flu.

Homeopathy and Croup.

Homeopathy and Diarrhea.

The treatment of Carbuncles with homeopathy.

The treatment of Impotence with homeopathy.

Homeopathy and infertility.

Homeopathy and menstrual cramps.

Homeopathy and the treatment of ulcers.

In treating illness, homeopathy is always safer than conventional alternatives; and this is for many a big advantage, and why people use it initially. These articles show how homeopathy can be used rather than popular, but largely ineffective and dangerous conventional drugs.

This is an excellent article on why homeopathy should be used to treat depression, not least because the dangers and ineffectiveness of antidepressant are gradually becoming more widely known.

And with the growing awareness of the dangers of antibiotics, and increased resistance to them, this article explains why homeopathy is a better alternative.

Failure of ConMed (9) The value of human life?

2012-01-06T12:59:00.000Z

Big Pharma company GlaxoSmithKline has been fined 400,000 pesos for killing 14 babies during a vaccine trial in Argentina between 2007 and 2008. Good news? Well, at least they were caught! But one Argentinian peso is worth just $0.25 dollars - about 20p. So I make that to be just over £500 per life lost. No prosecution of GSK personnel responsible for conducting these trials. And the money - well - it is not even pocket money for GSK. (For a more local report see this).

So what is the value of human life? I wonder what my sentence would be if I had murdered 14 babies? A heavy fine?

But life is cheap - at least when Pharmaceutical drugs are involved!

Estimates about how many people Big Pharma kill each year vary amazingly. This article states that it kills just 106,000 deaths per year. This leaves me wondering at what point they stopped counting! But it is a difficult calculation to make - not least because when deaths occur the association with Pharma drugs is usually denied. But at least this article tries to show the extent of the fraud, the illegal sales activities, and the total fines that Big Pharma companies have been paying in the USA. It also states clearly that spending money on drugs does not lead to saving lives. Whilst spending more on drugs than any other nation, the USA is 49th in terms of life-expectancy.

Drugs are regularly being linked to disease and death. The diabetes drug, Actos, for instance is now being linked with cancer. Last year it was banned in France because it was found to cause bladder cancer. But this does not prevent drug companies selling it elsewhere - for as long as they can get away with it!

When medicine causes disease, or death, it is called Iatrogenesis - caused by doctors. This article explains that it is not just drugs that cause this in conventional medicine, but many other factors. It states that iatrogenesis cause approximately 225,000 deaths each years, making it the 3rd biggest killer in the USA.

In an attempt to assist us, this article picks out the 10 most dangerous Pharma drugs. But is it wise to do this? Highlighting these is only the tip of the iceberg of dangerous Big Pharma drugs, and what is needed is to highlight that they are all potentially dangerous to our health, and even to our lives. But it does point that that for the first time, in nearly a century, automobile accidents are not the leading cause of accidental death any more (according to the US National Center for Health Statistics). This prize now goes to Big Pharma drug companies!

Our experience with Pharma drugs now points to only one sensible conclusion; they are a danger to our health, and to life itself. And it is no good trying to apportion blame to just a few drugs. They are all heavily implicated. Any trying to decide which drugs are okay, and which are dangerous is no good. We just don't have the information - mainly because the drug companies refuse to tell us!

The British Medical Journal has actually complained about this practice! An amazing outbreak of honesty from them! Apparently, when there is evidence that a drug might work - Big Pharma publishes it. When they have evidence that it doesn't, or where there is evidence that it might cause problems, the evidence can be witheld. I have discussed this in an earlier blog - and raised some of the issues it raises (or should raise) for all of us.

It would seem that we never know quite what we are taking when offered Big Pharma drugs. The only information we are given is positive information, and this means that it is bogus information! Nor do doctors and GPs. Nor do the Drug Regulatory bodies.

There is no-one out there appears either able, or willing, to protect us from the consequences of conventional medicine, and Big Pharma drugs. Except ourselves, of course. And we must all begin to say:

"NO" - "ENOUGH OF THIS" - "LIFE AND HEALTH IS TOO VALUABLE"

WAWWE (6) How can we eat to stay well?

2012-01-05T15:32:00.000Z

The problem with eating well, or our health, is that we are so often given loads of conflicting advice. Take for example the issue of breast feeding. The are 'scientific' studies to show that it is best for mums; and for babies. And there are conflicting studies saying that formula milk is best.

This happens regularly; and it is probably quite intentional! It is done to confuse us. There is one simple rule of thumb to determine with 'science' is right, and which is not. Who paid for the research?!!? Unfortunately, this information is not always immediately available to us. So there is a second rule to follow. What is the more natural option? Clearly, humanity has been designed to feed our young with breast milk from the mother. Any 'science' which says otherwise is probably funded by those who produce, and make profits, from the alternative.

This article links the use of formula milk in the USA with baby deaths. Whether this is true of not, the article argues, interestingly, that food regulators tend to assume that processed food is always safe, and that locally produced food is always dangerous.

Some the claims of this 'cheque-book science' can be quite absurd! It has, for instance, let to the EU banning any claim that water can prevent dehydration! Apparently, according to an article that appeared in the Telegraph, this finding was made by 21 scientist in Italy, who concluded that reduced water content in the body was a symptom of dehydration and not something that drinking water could subsequently control. Presumably, then 'dehydration' is a medical condition; and one that has nothing to do with water intake; and indeed, it is a medical condition that cannot be corrected by drinking water.

What about this research? Does sugar really accelerate the ageing process? The key here is the massive increase in sugar consumption over recent decades. It is used in lots of food processing and confectionary; it is not a 'natural' food; and we can live quite well without it. So it is probably correct. Yet we need to be careful here. Often, sugar consumption is attacked on the dubious basis that we are better off eating sweeteners; don't drink coke, it has sugar, and will make you fat; instead, drink 'diet' coke. If research suggests this, read this blog. You are better off with sugar than artificial sweeteners; but probably better off without both!

See, for example, this article on Aspartame linking it with both cancer and premature birth.

In this blog I will try to steer away from research that is clearly been used to promote processed, and largely unhealthy food - and here are a few articles that are linking what we eat to our health.

There are several article about Green Tea. It is always difficult to know just how clear-cut these claims are; but people having been drinking this tea for centuries; and it has always had the reputation of being a 'healthy' drink.
* This one links the drinking of Green Tea with reduced LDL Cholesterol levels.
* This one points to several studies linking Green Tea with reduced Cholesterol.
* This article associated the drinking of Green Tea and the prevention of cancer, and how much we should drink.
* And this one links Green Tea consumption with the prevention of Prostate Cancer.

And this two articles concern Probiotics - in an age when we have all been over-prescribed Antibiotics, without knowing just how dangerous to our health they can be.
* This article highlights 4 pieces of research that suggests Probiotics can reverse the damage done to our stomach by antibiotics.
* And this article appears to reinforce that message - that Probiotics can offset the damage caused by antibiotics.

Homeopathy - winning the battle against the denialists!

2012-01-05T14:02:00.000Z

This blog was first published at
http://arh.blogspot.com/2012/01/healthy-medicine-7-winning-argument.html

Homeopathy is gradually winning the health debate! Homeopathy denialists, with their so-called 'skeptical' arguments, have for the last decade been trying to undermine homeopathy, but they are gradually being found out for what they are - an attempt to support drug-based, conventional medicine from competition - not only from homeopathy but from other CAM therapies. Foremost amongst the 'winning' arguments for homeopathy is that research in three key European nations have recently come out 'in favour' of homeopathy.

In Sweden, an attempt by the ConMed Establishment to prevent the practice of homeopathy was over-ruled by the Supreme Administrative court. This case began when a medical doctor, trained in homeopathy in the UK, used it in his practice. He was put on probation by the 'Medical Responsibility Board', but he appealed on the grounds that he had used homeopathy when the patient requested it, and after conventional treatment had been ineffective. After being sentenced in two lower courts, the doctor had been forbidden to use homeopathy - on the grounds that 'homeopathy is unscientific'. So this case shows the lengths that people will go to prevent patients gaining access to homeopathy, and that when the 'there is no evidence to support homeopathy' argument is examined, it is found to be entirely without substance.

In Switzerland, the situation was similar to that in Sweden, but on a much larger scale. Anti-homeopathy sources tried to prevent the use of homeopathy in their compulsory national health insurance system. After an exhaustive investigation that took several year to complete, the conclusion reached in the Health Technology Assessment report, recently published, on the effectiveness, appropriateness, safety and costs of homeopathy in health care was as follows:

"In conclusion we have established that there is sufficient supporting evidence for the pre-clinical (experimental) as well as clinical effects of homeopathy, and that in absolute terms, as well as when compared to conventional therapies, it offers a safe and cost-effective treatment.”

In Italy, a team of researchers evaluated the effectiveness of homeopathic treatment through 'standard objective public health indicators'. There is a summary of this research here, and this is what they found.

"In general, results were significant for the drug usage indicator: the population of homeopathic care users uses fewer drugs than the standard population. Furthermore, it can be seen that the number of drugs and the drugs expenditure reduce significantly after homeopathic treatment. Hospitalization indicators tended to favour patients who had received homeopathic treatment but were not always statistically significant".

In other countries, like India, homeopathy is rapidly becoming the preferred medical therapy. This article explains that homeopathy, according to a survey conducted by the Indian government, is the number two preferred mode of treatment, after allopathy. And as the survey says, homeopathy costs just a fraction of conventional medical costs, and has no side-effects or adverse effects.

Even the UK government has refused to be brow-beaten by the homeopathy denialists. The House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee, in a 2010 report, led by the denialist and ex-MP, Evan Harris, and signed off by just 3 MPs, recommended that the NHS should stop spending money on homeopathy. The committee was able to do so by deciding to ignore completely the evidence presented to them by the ARH, and other UK homeopathy organisations. Despite this, the New Labour government, and more recently the Coalition government, have said they would not implement this recommendation, in favour of 'patient choice'.

Even so, the NHS continues to be dominated by the Conventional Medical Establishment, and there are still battles to be fought and won. The financial influence and industrial power of Big Pharma companies will ensure that this is so. For instance, throughout the country, local Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) are refusing to allow patients a choice of medical therapy when they are ill - and they do so on a similar basis - there is no evidence.... etc.

But homeopathy will win these battles for one very simple reasons - that in stark contrast to conventional medicine, homeopathy is a medical therapy that is entirely safe, and very effective.

And as a result, homeopathy is a medical therapy that people will want choose - when they have either personal experience of this, or they are given access to the information that demonstrates it.

BBC News, Big Pharma - and an outbreak of honesty?

2012-01-04T16:41:00.000Z

Could this be an outbreak of (very welcome) honesty within the BBC News service? Hitherto, their reporting of health issues has been lamentable, apparently only willing to publish the 'good' or 'positive' news about pharmaceutical drugs, and quite unwilling to tell its listeners, viewers and readers, any of the 'bad' or 'negative' news.

This morning, on its Today programme, the BBC reported that a BMJ (British Medical Journal) editorial had attacked the 'long-existing habit of the pharmaceutical and science community' to publish only selectively (that is, the good bits) about the clinical trials on new drugs. This, by itself, is an amazingly refreshing outbreak of honesty from the Conventional Medical Establishment! But to listen how the BBC dealt with this, listen to the broadcast at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9671000/9671074.stm

You will hear in the short clip that two examples are given of this Big Pharma practice, which has been going on for decades, largely without comment or concern from the BBC, or indeed, the mainstream media generally:

1. Tamiflu - about which Roche has apparently been refusing to publish data, and
2. Vioxx - where evidence about its link to heart attacks has been suppressed by the drug company.

Apparently, the BBC asked the drug companies to comment - but they declined! However, Professor Colin Blakemore said, presumably in their defence:

What journal will publish boring results?

Indeed, he appeared to assume that the public only wanted to hear the 'good' news, and certainly for as long as I can remember, this is all the BBC has wanted to report too.

Blakemore, perhaps mirroring the attitude of the entire conventional medical establishment, appears to have been more concerned about the need to 'entertain us' rather than ensuring, and safeguarding, the health of patients!

However, despite this unusual but welcome display of BBC honesty, it is also clear that they did not know how to ask searching and relevant questions on the issue. Indeed, they did not appear to recognise the importance to us all of this issue.

* How many pharmaceutical companies are failing to publish the full evidence about their drugs?

* On what basis are Big Pharma companies allowed to withhold important clinical information? Is this being done in order to sell more drugs? And if so, can this be in the interests of the health of patients?

* Are the Drug Companies being held fully accountable for any consequences to patients of the drugs they manufacture and sell? (Drug companies are being sued in the USA for the damage they cause patients, but not, it would seem, in this country).

* How many pharmaceutical drugs, and indeed which ones, are currently being prescribed without the full clinical information being known to medical personal and patients?

* How many patients are at this moment taking pharmaceutical drugs about which full information remains unknown? And what action will now be taken by the medical authorities to obtain this information?

* How long has the government, the NHS, and MHRA been aware of the practice? If the medical establishment has known about it, why has nothing been done? And if it did not know, is there a need to re-examine the basis on which pharmaceutical drugs been sanctioned, approved and prescribed to patients?

* Are local doctors and GPs aware of this practice? Are they, indeed can they be, fully aware of the impact any drug has on their patients?

Clearly, the BBC are more adept at criticising and attacking those people who are aware of the dangers of Big Pharma drugs, and who are looking for 'non-drug alternatives' to the medicine being offered to us within the current NHS-ConMed monopoly.

The Joy of Discovering Homeopathy

2012-01-04T10:19:00.000Z

I reproduce this email (sent to a homeopathy website) to demonstrate something that I remember well, as a former homeopathy denier (skeptic) - the joy of discovering how powerful homeopathy is as a healing medical therapy.

I am very excited to tell you about the *miracle of homeopathy.*
My mother who was diagnosed Rheumatoid Arthritis. R.A factor positive 5
years ago. Since Then she was on following medicines of Allopathic in
nature.

1: Methotrexate a DMARD ( Disease modifying antireheumatic Drug) for 3
years.
2: Later on she was given Leflunamide as DMARD.
3: Naproxen Sodium 500 mg B.D for severe pain from (NSAID Group).
4: Omeprazole to prevent drug induced ulcer.
5: Cetrizine for her allergies
6: Ecitalopram for depression.
7: Glucosamine and chondriton sulphate for joint supplementation.

But still she had severe pain in her wrist, elbow, knee, shoulder joints
especially early in the morning and night aggravated by cold and some how
ameliorated by motion. Although she was massaged twice a day but all in
vain. She also had dry cough at night and day time and had stomach problems.

Just to control her joint pains i studied and worked on various materia
medicas and reached to *Bryonia *and *Rhus Toxicodenderon.* I finally
selected *Rhus Toxidenderon 6 C* to give her*.* Last night i gave her 5
drops of Rhus Tox 6c in a teaspoonful of water. Today she again took the
same dose three times a day. Just now my sister called me with amazement
that mother had very less pain today and she also didnot take massage. she
was quite fine and extremely surprised about those miracleous drops.
Wow, I am very happy and dont know what to do next?
Your kind views will highly be appreciated.
Thanks
Noor Muhammad khan- DiHom
Clearly, Noor is studying homeopathy, so his discovery of homeopathy must have happened earlier. But here he speaks of the joy of being able to treat other people of conditions for which ConMed has no successful long-term answer.

Homeopathy denialists believe that their attacks on homeopathy will do harm to us. Little do they know that this kind of experience that will forever ensure that homeopathy lives on! Let them do their worst. Homeopathy will survive for two reasons. The most important is that it actually works! The other reason is that people are beginning to realise that drug-based medicine is failing. This case demonstrates both.

So thanks, Noor, for reminding me of the joys of discovering homeopathy. And long may you continue to cure people of their ailments using this wonderful therapy.

Breast Implantation; where is the Medical Honesty?

2012-01-03T14:53:00.000Z

What can we learn from this, the latest scandel arising within the world of ConMed? The issue of breast implantation has hit the headlines following news that French-made PIP implants were made with 'industrial' rather than 'medical' quality silicone, and that they rupture more easily than they should.

The main lesson, perhaps, is that it is difficult for patients to obtain the truth, or even full information, from the ConMed Establishment, and the governments and mainstream media who appear slavishly to support it.

The initial reaction of the UK government was that 'there was no problem'. Is there any more typical response to a medical scandal? Whenever there has been evidence that a Big Pharma drug, or a conventional medical procedure, might be dangerous, this is almost invariably the first response. "There is no evidence". "People should not be alarmed".

Within a matter of days, the UK government had changed its tone. Instead of a 1% failure rate, they had to admit that the failure rate was closer to 7-8%. It would appear that government was prepared to pour balm over health problems - even when it was not in possession of the full facts!

Indeed, there seems always to be a point at which the game of 'Russian Roulette' with our health becomes too dangerous - even for Government! As long as drugs, medical procedures, implants, etc., cause damage or death to just a small number, this appears to be acceptable. Beyond that point, however, they are forced to ask questions, slowly, tentatively, of course, whilst more 'reviews' are held!

Yet, this is perhaps nothing compared to the information given to the women who sought, and accepted these breast implants. Most of those who have spoken to the media tell a similar story - they were told that the silicone implants were safe, and rarely if ever ruptured. In the main, this procedure is carried out in private, for profit, clinics, who, of course, have a vested interest in providing women with such re-assurance. Whether these clinics are going to be as willing to accept responsibility now so many of these implants have, indeed, ruptured remains to be seen.

So was the information given to women honest? Did the clinics know that this manufacturer was not using medical-grade silicone? Probably not, as the French company selling them would have realised they would not have sold many had they done so. It was not in their interests to tell the clinics. So why did they use industrial-grade silicone? Was there no medical-grade silicone available? Or was it just because it was cheaper to do so, and so boosted company profits?

Anyway, it seems clear that private, for profit, health interests have dominated these medical procedures. The question is, has honest, full, transparent information for patients suffered as a result? There seems to be little doubt about this.

Moreover, there is little difference between this situation, and the ongoing sale of all ConMed drugs, and other medical procedures - as they are promoted by the National Health Service, and supported by Governments of all colours. In these health care matters, we, as patients, are dealing with enormously important, immensely influential, and frighteningly powerful private interests. And it would appear that profit is of central, over-riding importance. Our health, too often, appears to be a secondary consideration - regardless of whether we deal with private clinics, or the NHS, or indeed rely on Government and its agencies to tell us the truth about conventional medicine.

So perhaps the main lesson to be learnt is that we all have to be weary about what we are told about conventional medicine; that we need to question whether the information given to us is full, open and honest: or whether we are listening to the vested interests of a powerful medical establishment.

WAWWE (5). GM Food - for our nutrition or their profit?

2011-12-20T16:03:00.002Z

There is probably nothing sacred in this world that Big Corps, like Monsanto, will not jeopardise - if, of course, they think they can make enough profit from it! Our food, and its production, is certainly a case in point. Added to the herbicides and pesticides that have become part of our non-organic food supply for over 50 years now, GM food is the latest threat. GMO's, of course, are crops that can be sprayed with even larger amounts of pesticides - so they are considered to be 'good' - not only for the sellers of seed, but for the chemical industry too!

But are they good for our health?

This blog looks at the evidence for GMOs, and why they are so dangerous for our health, and why we should be actively avoiding them. First, though, ask yourself a question.

Have you asked for GMO-based food? Did you have a problem with non-GMO food?

This article looks at the growing issue about GMO foods, in this case, US corn, and asks the question - is it toxic, and therefore, a danger to our health.

This Mercola article lists 4 reasons why Monsanto threatens both the environment, and public health.

1. GM crops are linked with organ failure, and other biological dangers (see below)

2. The spawning of new superbugs

3. The Monsanto herbicide, Roundup, is creating superweeds and these are currently infesting millions of acres of land. (Click here for more on this subject here).

4. Monsanto is involved in producing Aspartame (see my recent blog on artificial sweeteners).

This powerful article argues, indeed it states, that Monsanto is 'secretly' poisoning us with crops that can withstand their herbicide, Roundup. It describes how this herbicide has caused birth defects for over 30 years, goes over evidence of 'horrific reproductive disorders' caused in tests with Roundup, and how regulatory agencies have failed in their duty to protect us.

Some countries have banned GMO's already - countries which, unlike us, are not beholden to Big Corp and their industrial and commercial success. This article covers the banning of GM crops in Peru. In doing so, Peru joins countries like Austria and Hungary.

The Mercola article demonstrates just why it is difficult to get our governments to act on GMOs. There is a massive, and extraordinarily expensive GMO campaign by the Bio-Tech industry that is targetting the US Congress. It says that $572 million has been spent - in an effort to 'ease' the regulatory controls on GM crops.

The same kind of pressure is being applied in Europe. This article looks at the battle one farmer is having with Monsanto, a battle that demonstrates the power of Big Corp, and their determination to get their own way, not matter who they have to harm.

So what price the health of consumers? When compared with the profits of Big Corp, the value placed on our health appears not to be an issue. GMOs are already finding their way into our baby food, according to this article.

There are an increasing number of studies are beginning to raise questions about the health impact of GMO crops. This article, for instance, links GMOs to organ failure.

And this Mercola interview with Dr Huber links GMO crops with the destruction of our gut flora. Perhaps GMOs are going to rival antibiotics in doing this!

Certainly, we, as consumers, have a part to play in resisting this. This article looks at the importance of continuing to say 'no' to GMO's. It lists the organisations helping us to do so in USA. What this means is that there has to be political battles to ensure that foods made from GMOs are properly labelled, so that we know what we are eating, and can avoid them. It also highlights the power that corporations like Monsanto have - when this comment is made in the article:

"It's no use pretending we have a representative government when we are faced with a corporate plutocracy that owns the government".

The farming fraternity, certainly the more traditional amongst them, is not happy with GMO crops. Farming practices used throughout the centuries are being overturned. And in this video, Mercola discusses why GMO crops are destroying our food system, even though they are not living up to the promises that preceded there introduction.

GM plants are certainly a threat to organic farming. This article suggests that organic farmers in the USA are now fighting back to protect their interests from Monsanto, with 270,000 of them prosecuting the company. Of course, organic farming is of little commercial value to companies like Monsanto.

Yet another good reason to buy organic food whenever possible!

Failure of ConMed (8) Cancer Treatment

2011-12-19T17:09:00.002Z

There is a cure for cancer! And ConMed is announcing them all the time in the mainstream media! The breakthrough is just around the corner - perhaps in 5 years time. Perhaps in 10. However, the problem is this: these promise of a cure, or a breakthrough, has been that they are in prospect! Indeed, the problem with ConMed promises about cancer treatment is simple - tomorrow just never arrives!

Take this article, for instance, which looks at Big Pharma claims about a new breakthrough in cancer treatment. The article, quite rightly, asks whether it is a breakthrough, or more likely, another drug that Big Pharma will use to boast their profits.

Perhaps another question ought to be asked - especially in view of the Cancer Act, 1939. This Act prevents Natural Therapies, such as homeopathy, discussing their treatment of cancer. So why is it that Big Pharma can raise our expectations about future cancer treatment? Especially given its track record, for the last 5 decades, and to date!

People have been contributing to cancer research, very generously, for many years now. Yet still we are left with treatments that everyone wants to avoid - chemotherapy, nuclear radiotherapy treatment, and ultimately operations to remove the growths when these methods do not work. Why should this be? Well, some of the advice we are receiving from organisations that supposedly represent the interests of patient actually seem to support the drug companies.

* For instance, the American Cancer Society is considered in this article (although much the same can be said of many 'patient support' groups). "Running with the money and away from the cure" is a headline. It reports that this society has regularly supported ConMed treatments when they have been questioned or attacked by expert groups. The article goes much further. It seeks to link the charitable payments we make to such patients groups, and the fact that the treatments they support appear to have little or no benefit for patients. It also points to the massive increases in the incident of various types of cancer in recent years, and the rather dubious action, or inaction, of this society that indicates it has not represented the interests of patients well over recent decades.

So what causes cancer?
Increasingly it is becoming clear that a large number of Big Pharma drugs are implicated in causing cancer, and that the more we take these drugs, the greater the incidence of cancer seems to become. There are many conventional Big Pharma drugs that cause cancer, HRT is perhaps the best known. Here I highlight just two I have found recent references to:

* Treat yourself with ConMed drugs for gastro-intestinal problems, and cancer risk increases.

* IVF Treatment - does it cause cancer?

So how successful is ConMed treatment of cancer?
Despite the hype, the answer has to be - not very successful at all.

* For instance, this article looks at the evidence that ConMed treatment for cancer does not work, and cannot be justified.

* And this article looks at how much research into cancer in recent years may have been based on research that was, in fact, fabricated!

* Many vaccines, including those given to prevent cancer, are now known to be causing massive health problems for the young women who take them.

* Indeed, the Gardisil vaccine for young girls is increasingly linked to serious reactions and ill-health.

* The link between HRT and cancer is now well documented; and one Big Pharma company has recently had to pay large damages to women who got breast cancer after taking it.

* Some ConMed practitioners are now recommending aspirin for cancer prevention; at levels of toxicity that cause other serious illnesses.

* And even if and when chemotherapy works, one of its nasty 'side-effects' is brain damage.

* This research asks another important question too. If chemotherapy kills cancer cells, are these cancer cells already dying? In other words, is it as effective as is often made out.

* But whatever chemotherapy does, the outcomes for health can be drastic. This article alludes to research that states that over one-third of women given chemotherapy actually decide to stop because of the 'terrible' side-effects.

* And cancer screening tests, so often said to be 'life-savers', are now being found to be of little value.

* This article shows that MRI scans have no medical benefits, and this one that breast screening is of little value at all.

Are there alternatives?
Well yes, there are many new approaches, linked to diet, natural therapies, avoidance of microwave activity, and many others. But of course, the 1939 Cancer Act means they cannot be mentioned apparently! Unless, of course, it is Big Pharma who is makings the claims! So I merely refer you to the following internet articles - without comment!

* In this video, Dr Sherri Tenpenny talks about breast cancer and the importance of not rushing quickly into making treatment decisions.

* And could it just be, that despite the billions that have been spent on medical research, there are more natural answers to cancer?

The Cancer Act was intended to prevent people making unsupportable claims about the treatment of cancer. The intention was not to stop us obtaining good quality information about people who were looking at safer, more effective, non-drug treatments.

Are you ill. Allow homeopathy to help

2011-12-13T15:55:00.000Z

This blog was first published at http://arh.blogspot.com/2011/12/homeopathy-heals-3-ill-allow-homeopathy.html

If you are ill, and it does not matter how the illness has been diagnosed, homeopathy can help you. This article explains how it does so - by treating the individual, and his/her symptoms rather than a conventionally diagnosed 'disease'.

All that is necessary is to find a remedy that matches your symptoms, and it will work. Sometime, in 'first-aid' situations, this can be quite simple - it is something you can try for yourself. In more complex illness the patient will need the expertise of a homeopath.

In this week's 'Homeopathy Heals' I am drawing attention to a series of internet articles that demonstrate the wide range of illnesses that homeopathy can heal!

Vertigo (dizziness). Some simple remedies suggested for common types of vertigo.

Headaches. Several remedy suggestions, with short remedy pictures, in this article

Tetanus. Always have some Ledum around, in case of cuts and grazes.

Chicken Pox. Some sensible non-drug strategies for coping with this illness. Carbo Veg is a homeopathic remedy that can be used when suffering from chicken pox - see a homeopath if it does not ease the condition.

Croup. Some major remedies, with symptom pictures, suggested here.

Nausea and Motion Sickness. Several first-aid remedy suggestions here, with brief symptom pictures.

Sleep disorders. Remedy suggestions here, and remedy descriptions.

Cystitis (bladder infections). Several remedies suggested here, but consult a homeopath if it persists, or is a regular occurance.

Genital Warts.

Gout. Four remedies suggested here - but if condition is chronic, it is advisable to consult a homeopath.

Fibromyalgia. An article by a homeopath who has researched the condition, and treated many cases.

Angina. Not an illness for homeopathic self-prescribing, but some sensible non-drug suggestions and alternative remedies and strategies to cope with the condition.

Heart Problems. Look at this article and video to see what can be achieved

Homeopathy is becoming increasingly popular as many people are now looking for 'non-drug' alternatives to conventional medicine, dominated as it is by Big Pharma drugs.

A local homeopath can be found by visiting this website.

Failure of ConMed (7) Evidence based medicine?

2011-12-13T14:06:00.000Z

The claim of Big Pharma companies, and the Conventional Medical Establishment, is that it supports 'Evidence-Based' Medicine (EBM). The argument here is that in making a judgement about the efficacy of medical therapies, we need less 'evidence' (especially when the evidence proves to be poor, or just wrong, in the course of time), and instead place more reliance on 'outcomes'. ConMed, of course, wants neither.

Much of the 'evidence' that supports ConMed is poor or unreliable evidence. This important article outlines the problems associated with EBM, and should be read by anyone who is looking for a safer, more effective medical therapy, but is not yet ready to accept that ConMed is failing. It begins by questioning the very concept of EBM.

The assumption that EBM is good science is unsound from the start. Decision science and cybernetics (the science of communication and control) highlight the disturbing consequences.EBM fosters marginally effective treatments, based on population averages rather than individual need. Its mega-trials are incapable of finding the causes of disease, even for the most diligent medical researchers, yet they swallow up research funds. Worse, EBM cannot avoid exposing patients to health risks. It is time for medical practitioners to discard EBM's tarnished gold standard, reclaim their clinical autonomy, and provide individualized treatments to patients.

And it continues by putting the individual patient at the centre of concern.

"The key element in a truly scientific medicine would be a rational patient. This means that those who set a course of treatment would base their decision-making on the expected risks and benefits of treatment to the individual concerned. If you are sick, you want a treatment that will work for you, personally. Given the relevant information, a rational patient will choose the treatment the will be most beneficial. Of course, the patient is not in isolation but works with a competent physician, who is there to help the patient. The rational decision making unit then becomes the doctor-patient collaboration.

The continuing survival of ConMed can be put down to the failure of governments, national heath services, the mainstream media in telling us the truth about a form of medicine. Evidence of its failure is rife - but rarely reported. Indeed, the problems of writing this regular blog is that there is just so much information about corruption in the highest circles, the failure of Big Pharma drugs, the way these drugs create illness, the havoc they cause to individuals and families, the the epidemic rise of so many chronic diseases. So look through these internet articles - outlined only briefly here but available to anyone who wants to know why pharmaceutical drugs are not making us better, but sicker!

Let's start with the osteoporosis drug, Fosamax. This article explains how it can actually cause fractures, and brittle bones - that is, it makes worse the problem it is supposed to help! This has been known for many years; but the drug is still being used with patients who believe they are taking it to help their illness!

Simple painkillers, so many people take every day thinking they are safe, can cause death - even with the smallest doses. Here is another article, looking at Tylenol, and its DIEs.

The antipsychotic drug, Alecza, which can cause fatal lung disease.

These diabetes drugs can cause Pancreatitis, and Pancreatic Cancer.

And yet more evidence of the harm that antibiotics can cause - this time painful neurological effects.

Psychiatric drug takers are unaware of the risks to their health.

The once-upon-a-time 'entirely safe' Statin drugs - that can now cause prostate cancer!

Drug cocktails can seriously damage your health! So do you take more than one drug?

Can antibiotics taken in pregnancy really lead to autism? And if so, how long will it be before the link is seriously investigated? And how long before the ConMed Establishment admits it?

And how quietly the NHS has changed from the Cervarix vaccine to Gardisil! I wonder why?

Is it because Cervarix has been such a disaster in the UK -as demonstrated in this case?

Or is it because Gardisil has been more successful elsewhere? This seems unlikely!

And Gardasil has certainly been a problem in Australia!

So, certainly, I am not alone in predicting more tragedy for British teenagers!

So, perhaps our government, the NHS, Big Pharma, and the ConMed Establishment is just not aware?

Or, more likely, is it that they are just not prepared to help making us aware?

We Are What We Eat (4) Sweeteners and our food.

2011-12-13T11:59:00.000Z

One of my themes concerning the actions of Big Pharma drug companies is that they do not allow considerations of human health to interfere with their profits. My contention is that they manufacture drugs known to be harmful to our health, hide this information from view, market the drug, pocket the profits, and only then does the harm done by pharma drugs become an issue.

Surely Big Food companies do not do the same thing! Well, actually, they do!

Big Food play the same 'for profit' games as Big Pharma - at the expense of our health.

Sweetening our food is just one example. One way to increase food consumption is to sweeten it. And lots of foods are sweetened to make them poor palatable to us, more likely that we will buy them. Many do not need sweetening. Many sweetened foods are not sweetened by 'natural' sugars, but by artificial chemicals, such as aspartame.

There is, according to this article, a new 'artificial sweetener' disease. It has many symptoms. Recurring headaches, unbearable migraines, depression, anxiety, muscle pain, arthritis, buzzing or ringing in ears, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgfia, irritable bowel disease, Crohn's disease, inflammation, acid reflus. But as the article says, it is never called ASD - artificial sweetener disease. This article suggests that the Gulf War Syndrome can be connected to artificial sweeteners.

This article looks closer at the connection between sweeteners and Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBF). It links them with brain lesions, enlarged and calcified kidneys, male infertility, increased mortality, and even spontaneous abortions in rabbits!

Violence can also be also linked to sweeteners in teenagers. As the article said, the soft drinks beloved of so many children are entirely devoid of nutrition, but are drunk is large quantities. "Diets high in refined sugar can also cause high blood sugar levels and hypoglycemic episodes, which profoundly impact our physical and psychological health. Hypoglycemic episodes often lead to angry and violent outbursts, and could be a direct cause of violence in children".

And as the article says, soft drinks also contain caffeine, which can contribute to hypoglycemic episodes and can also provoke aggression by raising adrenaline levels. Strange, then, that we so often give our children these drinks - as a treat!

Aspartame is the best known of these sweeteners, and as this article states, it is probably the most dangerous substance added to our food. Apparently, Aspartame accounts for over 75% of adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA. This article explains the diseases caused by this poison, and how it is made. It is in a vast number of food and drink products, particularly if something is described as 'low sugar', or 'diet'.

Aspartame comes under many names? Perhaps they are all invented to confuse us - and no doubt they fool far too many of us! Aspartame brand names includ NutraSweet, Equal, Sweet One, and Spoonful.

Yet if you want to see dramatically what Aspartame does to living organisms, look at this remarkable article! It kills Ants. And Ants soon learn to avoid it. It is a pity humanity cannot respond to this poison in the same way!

But we don't, we even think that drinks containing artificial sweeteners are good for us! This article looks at sports drinks and sweeteners. Such drinks are regularly and intensively advertised, portraying them as 'scientifically' formulated to help athletes rehydrate their bodies after exertion. This kind of 'science' is the same 'science' that supports the Big Pharma industry - bought science, cheque-book science, science serving those who wish to make big profits at our expense.

Yet we do want to have sweeteners in our food and drink, and not all of them are bad for us. This article advises us to use only the best natural sweeteners. It contains good, sensible advice for anyone wanting to avoid the health impact of artificial, Big Food, for profit sweeteners.

Failure of ConMed (6) Big Pharma - too big to fail?

2011-12-05T13:23:00.001Z

There is a worldwide campaign to encourage us all, even to make us all, take toxic Big Pharma drugs. In part this can be seen in the refusal of governments, the national media, the ConMed Establishment, and the doctors and medics who we consult with face-to-face, day-by-day, to tell us about the consequences of taking them.

But increasingly, it is the policies and strategies of government that seek to force us to 'take the medicine' - whether we want to or not.

In last week's newsletter we saw how in Australia parents faced losing benefits if they refused to vaccinate their children.

Now, this week, we hear that Australia is seeking to force parents to medicate children if they are diagnosed with ADHD.

Why is this happening? Certainly, BigPharma does not seem confident that we will take their drugs voluntarily. This article, from the organisation VacTruth, references 8 websites that focus on people who, for one reason or another, are refusing to take BigPharma drugs and vaccines. Increasingly, people are realising that they are unsafe.

And this article demonstrates how many people (heart patients in this instance) are refusing to take Big Pharma drugs - even when they are given away, free.

So even when the truth is being kept from us, many people still find out, and sensibly, say 'No' to the ConMed Establishment's urge to drug us all!

However, the ConMed Establishment continues to try to prevent this information getting out - but clearly they are not succeeding. More and more people are realising that drugs and vaccines, given to us in the interests of health, are actually making us ill, and causing disease and death.

Even non-health sites on the internet are now getting the message. This 'Before it's News' feature looks at how BigPharma drugs are no the biggest cause of 'accidental' death (although how accidental might be argued), and the way drug companies pay doctors to prescribe them to us. As they say, we are being peddled "sick pills for well people"!

So what is happening that we are not being told about? What are the health issues that are not being discussed openly, transparently, honestly with patients? Here are just a few stories you won't see in the mainstream media, or be allowed to discuss with your GP!

Statin drugs cause diabetes and muscle damage? Not new news, but yet another potential danger of this drug we have been told is 'entirely safe' for decades! Yet, quite, remarkably, doctors are still telling themselves that Statin drugs are good for us! So there will be little enlightenment from that quarter of the ConMed Establishment!

And the link between Big Pharma drugs and childhood diabetes has also been made with antipsychotics drugs too.

Another drug, Multaq, prescribed now for several years, has now been found to be more dangerous than hitherto known, and now placed under restriction for safety reasons.

However, the licence for the drug Zigris, has been withdrawn. No-one else is to be prescribed the drug, and those people taking it have to be taken off.

The maximum dose of Citalopram has now been reduced. It causes dependency!

Avastin, a drug for breast cancer, has, at last, after 4 years, been withdrawn by the FDA, who now describe it as useless and dangerous. But as this article explains, doctors can still prescribe it 'if they feel like it'. Quite amazing really. Where is patient protection? Where is drug regulation?

Yet the most alarming news, which has drawn little attention from the mainstream media, concerns more popular, widely used, over-the-counter drugs. Paracetamol overdose has now been found to be fatal - even if taken at recommended levels. It has been found that only a slight overdose can cause multiple organ collapse, and death. In fairness, and most unusually, the BBC did cover this story; but only with a balm that sought to cover the real seriousness of the situation. It said that

"an MHRA spokesman said the changes were not made because of safety concerns. He said the aim was to ensure children got the right dose for their age".

That's all okay then!

So are we heading for another Vioxx? WDDTY believe that we might be. Taking pain killers (because we believe them to be safe, and are not informed otherwise) is becoming more and more common.

So what is the reason for us being kept in the dark, about painkillers, and other Big Pharma drugs? Why is is that enforced medication, especially in the USA, continues to increase? The reason seems all to simple, and to use a phrase analogous to the recent Banking crises:

Big Pharma is too big to fail.

Somehow, we must be encouraged to continue taking the drugs.

We Are What We Eat (3) Fluoride and Water Supply

2011-11-30T14:48:00.000Z

Did you know that water companies add fluoride to some of our water supplies? And did you know that all local authorities in the UK have the right to ask them to do so?

And did you know that Fluoride was a poison?

We all need to know more about about Fluoride in our water supplies. A good place to start is to have a look at this article - a good starting point. In it, Dr Mercola speaks to Jeff Green, a long-time campaigner against Fluoride, about the many dangers.

Fluoride is a poison, and one that has not been tested for safety. This may sound amazing - but as this article states, it is true.

Adding Fluoride to the water supply is enforced mass medication. Once it is added, it is difficult for anyone to remove it. This article argues that this violates our constitutional rights. Actually, it violates our human rights, and the ability of people to choose what medication they take, and do not take.

And the good new, at least in the USA, is that those responsible for adding this poison to our water supplies, are now being sued.

Why? The problem is a disease called Fluorosis. This article talks about the disease, and its causes, and its close links with Fluoride, added to the water supplies. In effect, children have been overdosed; and parents have not been told about it.

One reason, the main reason, for adding Fluoride to the water supply is that it help prevent tooth decay. Yet it would appear that even dentists now disagree with this. This article also explains the right local authorities have in respect for adding Fluoride to our water - and our ability to sue them for doing so!

But there are other reasons. One recent Mercola article states that Fluoride in the Pineal Gland, which collects the Fluoride in your body, can cause cancer.

The ConMed establishment, with the support of the Big Phatma companies, are suspected of favouring mass, enforced medication through our water supply. This Natural News article expresses many of the worries from a US perspective, and suggests that there are plans to add Lithium and Statin drugs to the water supply - on the basis that it is 'good for us'. Of course, it is not.

One important, indeed vital element of any healthy diet is healthy ingredients. Water is one of the main ingredient of any meal, any drink.

So how do you find out whether your water supply has fluoride added to it? Write to your water company, and ask them - in the UK (at least) they are obliged to tell you.

The Failure of ConMed (6) Vaccines

2011-11-30T11:42:00.000Z

This weeks blog focuses on vaccination. Although vaccines appear to be the great hope of Big Pharma for their future profits, there is, in fact, no other single area in which the failure of ConMed can be more convincingly demonstrated. The evidence against vaccination is now so strong, no-one should consider allowing themselves, or their children, to have one.

This article, and the attached videos, outlines 49 sudden deaths, 213 permanent disabilities, and discusses the 'silent plan to poison your child - mostly from the Gardisil-Cervarix vaccines. It also outlines how US Presidential candidates are being supported by Big Pharma companies - and how this money is being used to support political campaigns for mandatory vaccinations.

Death and permanent disability arising from vaccines are regularly reported (although not by governments, mainstream media, or the ConMed Establishment). This should not be surprising, as the ingredients of every vaccine contains 'adjuvents' which are known poisons. This article describes how Thimerosol (Mercury) may have been removed from some vaccines - but has been replaced by Aluminium. Out of the frying pan, into the fire it would appear! And of course, these poisons are being injected into our blood stream, and so transported throughout our bodies.

This article thinks that Big Pharma vaccines now cause more disease than they cure. And perhaps this can no longer be seriously denied. More seriously, it asks questions about the links between vaccines and very serious epidemic illness like AIDs, Gulf War Syndrome (soldiers received multi-vaccines prior to engagement), and much more.

At the moment, it is the flu vaccine that is being pushed as hard as any other. But this article provides evidence that it is largely ineffective for most people, but still quite deadly for many. This does not seem to be a good deal. Morever, if you read this article, it suggests that having a flu shot can risk the health of your brain! Yet there are much simpler alternatives. Vitamin D might be a much safer alternative for flu vaccinations. So what are our doctors telling use? Well, this article appears to suggest to our GPs that the flu vaccine is 'evidence based' - so the advice is likely to remain the same. Continue vaccinating people - regardless of the known consequences.

And what we all need to understand is that the failure of Big Pharma vaccines is not a matter of statistics, it is a huge number of personal tragedies. This 13-year-old girl is now in a 'waking coma' because she was given the Cervarix (HPV) vaccine. Or this well-known journalist who was admitted to hospital within 24 hours of having a vaccination. This Guardian article explains the plight of the journalist - who was trying to protect himself from yellow-fever, apparently.

But vaccines are big business, and the source of big profits for Big Pharma. So more and more vaccines are being offered to us. This article examines the situation in the USA - where children can expect more than 60 separate vaccinations now - all in the name of health!

The time to say 'No, no more' is here. And indeed, an increasing number of people are saying 'No', and this has serious implications for Big Pharma profits.

So how can Big Pharma continue to profit from such vaccines? One way is not to offer them, but to force them on us, whether we want them or not. In this article, it is the children of poor families in Australia who are the target. If these families want to receive their 'Family Tax Benefit' they have to have their children vaccinated - what an awful choice this gives parents. Risk your child's health, or lose financial benefits. Your money and your life? And who profits from this?

The increasing failure of other Big Pharma drugs is also an issue, as this article suggests. Antibiotics, once Big Pharma's great claim to medical competence, are rapidly failing. And they see vaccines as taking over from them.

So why aren't we being told about all this? It would appear that however much damage vaccines cause, however many personal and family tragedies are caused by them, the British media is determined not to tell us about it. Is Big Pharma advertising just too important? Or are the Media Moguls, and the Big Pharma moguls, is concert about what we are, and what we are not allowed to know? I understand, for instance, that James Murdoch is also on the board of a large pharmaceutical company.

Sounds cosy!

Homeopathy and Cancer (Healthy Medicine)

2011-11-29T16:31:00.001Z

This blog was first published on the http://arh.blogspot.com/ blog, but was removed because of the difficulty in the UK discussing the medical treatment of cancer. With a few minor amendments, here it is.

Can homeopathy heal cancer? Well, no, of course it doesn't. The Cancer Act, 1939 does not allow any such claim to be made. Therefore, it is unusual for the mainstream media, but the Telegraph has recently retold the story of Gemma, and her recovery from cancer. In 2010, my 'Homeopathy Safe Medicine' blog featured Gemma's story. It is, indeed, a quite a remarkable story. It is worth looking at these two articles in their own right, but also the responses to them, mainly made by homeopathy 'denialists', who, rather than being 'delighted' with the possibility that people claim that homeopathy has treated their cancer, do their best to rubbish all such stories. At the time of writing there are over 50 responses to the Telegraph article, and what they demonstrate is that the supporters of conventional medicine have no interest in such stories, and no intention of delving further.

"This is just and anacdotal, subjective experience - it is not science..."
"Homeopathy has never been shown to be better than placebo...."
"I just can't believe in homeopathy... it is quackery"
"It is cruel, because it raises people's hopes....."
"It is just 'spontaneous remission'...."

I know Gemma, and I know that she is pleased to be well. Indeed, she is pleased to be alive! So why do the denialists go out of their way to deny the evidence in from of them? And why does the Establishment support them?

Gemma's experience is not unique. Indeed, it is not even unusual. This is the story of Kaviraj. And this Kevin's story'. And these are just two that have appeared in my 'Homeopathy Safe Medicine blog. There is much, much more; many more people who have tried homeopathy have found it to be both safe, free from awful adverse reactions, and effective. The whole topic of Homeopathy and cancer does need to be discussed, if only as a matter of information. So here are some recent articles on the subject.

* The Faculty of Homeopathy has recently held a conference on 'Homeopathy in supportive cancer care - and integrative approach'.

* And this article looks at how a homeopathic remedy emanating from Cuba is being used in the treatment of cancer in China.

* Homeopathy even works with animals that contract cancer. See this description of the homeopathic treatment of animals with cancer - and article that includes several case studies.

What this experience means is that homeopaths are being asked to treat cancer. Indeed, many homeopaths are developing programmes for doing so. Take this example -Welling Homeopathy have developed an interesting programme that focuses on the treatment of cancer.

* Even for people who want to go through the gruelling adverse effects of ConMed's cancer treatment, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, homeopathy can still be useful in combating some of this suppressive treatment.

So what should be done about homeopathy and cancer? Certainly, anyone looking seriously at developing more effective ways of treating cancer should not be dismissing any form of treatment out of hand - as the law appears to demand. Such an approach is a totally 'unscientific'. Science demands that the world is first observed, and then explained. Cancer patients deserve nothing less than this, unless we are all to assume that Big Pharma drug and radiation treatments are all that are available. There has to be a search for truth, and where possible, the development of new approaches to cancer.

As more people look towards homeopathy for treatment, homeopaths need to 'hone' their techniques and their strategies, not to deny them. And there is promising research evidence that suggests why we should be doing so.

* In particular, look at this article, which states that when considering the treatment of breast cancer, homeopathy should be doing this in conjunction with other natural therapies.

Of course, more scientific research should be done, both pure research into the impact highly diluted homeopathic remedies has on tumours, and through 'outcome' studies. As far as pure research is concerned, this process has already begun.

In this study, the Cytotoxic effects of ultra-diluted remedies on breast cancer, 4 remedies were used, with interesting, and positive results.

And in this study, just one remedy, Ruta Grav, was studied for its effect on brain tumours, again interesting and positive results.

So there is increasing evidence that homeopathy has a part to play. Moshe Frenkel, MD., looks here at the evidence for homeopathy in the treatment of cancer in this paper. Unlike the homeopathy denialists, Frenkel comes to a proper science-based conclusion. He says that the existing data 'necessitates further studies'. He says that there are already two conclusions from what has already been done.

* First, homeopathic remedies 'appear to be safe and without adverse reactions'.
* Second, that there may be a role for homeopathy in improving the quality of life of cancer patients.

Yet because homeopathy is a safe and gentle form of medicine, in contrast to the toxicity of ConMed treatment, I would argue that it is the development of treatment that should be the main objective of homeopathy at this time. And much work has already been done here too, especially in India, and especially by Dr AU Ramakrishnan, who has developed a method of treatment, which he calls 'plussing'. He can make extraordinary claims of success over the past 20 years of practice. For instance, he claims a 73% success rate for breast cancer, 55% for stomach cancer, 75% for pancreatic cancer, 32% for liver cancer, 40% for colon cancer, 80% for prostate cancer, and so on.
A Homeopathic Approach to Cancer. Dr AU Ramakrishnan, Catherine R Coulter. Quality Medical Publishing. 2001.

Gemma's story in the Telegraph may be the start of something new and exciting. It means that a national newspaper has now been brave enough to publish a story about homeopathy and cancer. It could open the door for people with cancer, to try new treatments. It could provide an opportunity for the mainstream media to begin telling us more about such treatments. It could start a process within the NHS to compare and contrast the value of different treatments, even to offer them to people who might otherwise die of their cancers, or the toxic treatments that conventional medicine has been offering them now, for decades.

We are what we eat (2)

2011-11-16T16:25:00.001Z

'The Food Hospital' is a series of Channel 4 television programmes (8pm, Tuesday evenings). Last night's edition featured a young girl, a dancer, who suffered from Crohn's Disease. She was taking Steroids to control her condition, although it appears they were not doing so. In order to replace them, she was given a dietary programme, which she followed, with what appeared to be outstanding results.

The Channel 4 webpage is entitled 'Using food as medicine'. I mention it for three reasons.

First, to congratulate Channel 4 for having the audacity to transmit a programme that is mildly critical of ConMed drugs - not something that the mainstream media (and certainly not the BBC) does often.

Second, it highlights the growing realisation that there are better, safer, and more effective responses to disease that resorting to Big Pharma drugs, and that tiny pockets within the NHS are now prepared to recognise this (another example is the greater use of 'talking therapies' in the treatment of depression).

And third, the central importance of good diet to our health and well-being. We are, indeed, what we eat!

Although this series of blogs does not give dietary advice, it is going to focus on many issues concerned with what is wrong with the food and drink that we consume, or perhaps more accurately, the food and drink we are encouraged (by big food corporations) to consume. Indeed, the concept of the 'Big Food' industry is going to be central to many of the arguments used here.

Big Food 'adds value' to food by processing it.

But the 'value' added to our food is a monetary rather than dietary concept. Food, taken from the ground, and consumed in its (almost) natural form, is usually inexpensive, and good for our health, our well-being, and our energy levels. The more that food is processed the more expensive it becomes - and the less value it is to us, and the way we function.

Take, for example, this article about the chicken we eat - especially from 'fast food' outlets, such as McDonalds. This is not fresh chicken, taken from the field, and cooked. As the article states, the 'chicken' is only 50% of what you are eating. You are also eating foaming agents, and preservatives - not there to assist your health, but to enhance profit. As the author states, not many people realise what they are eating. It is called chicken - so we believe it to be chicken.

Or this article about Pringles Potato chips. Made from potatoes. Well, no - actually they are made from a slurry of rice, wheat, corn and potato flakes that are then pressed into shape, cooked. An enjoyable, harmless snack? Well, no - as the author explains, rather than eating something we consider good and wholesome, the production process actually creates Acrylamide, a substances known to be carcinogenic.

Over the coming weeks and months, we will examine more about food, how Big Food produces it, processes it, and profit from it, often at the expense of our health.

Michael Jackson - death by drugs

2011-11-16T14:24:00.000Z

Michael Jackson died of a drugs overdose. His personal doctor, Conrad Murray, has been convicted of manslaughter. It is a tragic case. The death of a man revered by many. And the conviction of a conventional doctor for failing to care for him properly.

Yet it was a tragedy waiting to happen, and which probably happens many thousand times each year, is less well-publicised circumstances.

On the one hand, we have a man who believes that his problems can be solved by conventional medical (ConMed) drugs, and as he takes more of them, demands more.

On the other hand, we have a ConMed doctor who also believes that pharmaceutical drugs are helpful, and that his training enables him to control their side-effects - or, as I prefer to call them - disease-inducing-effects, or DIEs.

So develops a situation where the patient is giving a cocktail of drugs, including Propofal, Loracepam, Medazalin and Valium - and he dies. All because he wanted to sleep.

Did Jackson know the possible consequences? Did Murray tell him? Or were they both playing with fire?

What we have to remember is that Big Pharma drugs are now the biggest single killer in the USA. So this incident, high-profile as it has been, is not alone.

Champix, or Chantix - a drug worth banning?

2011-11-16T14:12:00.001Z

Champix (or Chantix in the USA) is an anti-smoking drug manufactured by Pfizer. It is causing havoc with people's lives through its quite dreadful disease-inducing-effects (DIEs). And now the Health Sciences Institute is asking the question - should it be banned?

According to the HSI newsletter, published today, the response of the drug company, and the drug regulators, are the usual ones:
* that the risks are outweighed by the benefits.
* that all drugs have 'side-effects'.
* with this drug, it is being claimed that the 'side-effects' are just the withdrawal symptoms from smoking.

So, of course, the drug will not be banned, or withdrawn - not yet, anyway. It will continue to be prescribed to people who want to stop smoking, quite regardless of the evidence against it. HSI claim that over 1 million people within the UK have been prescribed the drug. This has been the history of Big Pharma drugs over the decades; a wonder drug is introduced; so it is found to have serious DIEs; but those DIEs are denied or discounted; eventually the denials are no longer viable so the drug is withdrawn or banned - often many years, even decades after it's introduction.

The 'side-effects' listed on the package insert include nausea, constipation, gas, vomiting, and 'changes in dreaming'. But, as usual, this is only part of the pictrure, and there are many more DIEs that are not listed - including diarrhoea, gingivitis, chest pain, back pain, dizziness, anxiety, depress, emotional disorder, polyuria, menstrual disorder, and hypertension

The HSI article includes the comments on the DIEs Champix (or Chantix) users, and these make worrying reading - and demonstrate just how Big Pharma drugs can change people's lives, and lead to serious damage to their health. Can I suggest you go to their website, and whilst there, sign up for their consistently interesting newsletters. Clearly, the DIEs mentioned are a matter for serious concern - and are much more dangerous to health than smoking. And I say this without wanting to imply that smoking is a good thing!

The 'cure' is clearly worse than the 'disease' in purports to cure.

And there are much safer, more effective treatments to help people stop smoking that this drug.

Homeopathy is Healthy Medicine

2011-11-15T14:36:00.000Z

This blog was first published in Homeopathy Pure and Simple at http://arh.blogspot.com/

Homeopathy - its time is coming! So states Amy Lansky, PhD., in this lovely article. If you are new to homeopathy, or if you are looking for a safer, more effective medical therapy, you should read it. And it is hard to disagree with her argument that 'energy' medicine, and homeopathy in particular, is the medicine of the near future. If the 19th century saw its birth and development, and the 20th century saw it being overshadowed by the promise of the emerging 'scientific' medicine, the 21st century is proving that so-called 'scientific' or conventional medicine (ConMed) has little to offer patients, who are now, in increasing numbers, looking a real, effective alternative.

And as the Faculty of Homeopathy argues, homeopathy is not only far safer that ConMed, it is also less expensive. This article refers to a French government report that found that the total cost per patient receiving homeopathic treatment was 15% less than the cost of conventional treatment.

I must say that I would dispute this figure, as it is probably far higher. As a practising homeopath, I have always found that homeopathy was a difficult business. A patient walks through the door, you treat him, or her, and he, or she, gets better. End of business! ConMed treatments don't make people better in that permanent way; often patients are told they have to take drugs for the rest of their lives, their ailments and diseases carry on, ameliorated, but not cured. And with the disease-inducing-effects of Big Pharma drugs, conventional medicine has, in time, even more illness and disease to treat and pay for.

Yet talking a individuals being 'cured' of disease does not go down well with those who criticise homeopathy - the homeopathy deniers. They are dismissed as 'anecdotes'; their testimony is not 'scientific'. They forget that these people, myself included, are patients, who were once ill, but are now better. And being well is what all patients want. So let's look at a few more 'anecdotes'!

This is one - who states that "after about 18 weeks of being on homeopathy my life went from being almost unbearable to the best I have ever known". Note that she says that homeopathy was 'a bit pricey' - but remember that she clearly paid for her treatment, and did not have it on the NHS. We tend to compare 'free' health treatment on the NHS with paying for homeopathy privately. And homeopathy denialists are keen that patients should be refused the choice of having homeopathy paid for by the NHS.

Here are two cases of 'retained placenta' - cured by the homeopathy remedy, Sepia.

And here, a single patient suffering from obesity, and much else, treated with Calcarea.

And here, a case of a young boy with facial tics, again treated with Calcarea.

But of course, anecdotes don't remain as such after a significant number of people have been known to be cured. They becomes statistics - people who know the value of homeopathy. So altogether, these 'anecdotes' now mean, according to the British Homeopathic Association, that some 15% of the UK population currently use homeopathy. And as this article explains, part of the anecdotal evidence now includes celebrities such as Paul McCartney, David Beckham, Twiggy, Roger Daltrey, Susan Hampshire, Tina Turner, Louise Jameson, Gaby Roslin, Jude Law, Sade Frost, Nadia Sawalha, Richard Branson, Debra Stephenson, Meera Syal, and of course the Queen, and many of the Royal Family.

And where homeopathy is used, high levels of patient satisfaction are usually reported. This is a study emanating from Germany, but I wonder how many of you know about a pilot project undertaken in 2008 by the Department of Health, and the NHS, in Northern Ireland. This, too, showed great support from patients, and considerable benefits for the NHS. These included, amongst others, a reduction in drugs expenditure, an alleviation of GP and hospital workload, and savings accruing from reduced sick leave. What happened as a result? Nothing! There are clearly people in the NHS and the Department of Health who don't want you to know just how good homeopathy is! I cannot even find anything about the pilot study on their website! However, I have a copy of the PDF report - and if anyone emails me I will forward a copy to them.

Yet everywhere homeopathy is under attack. Why? The underlying reason is that the ConMed Establishment wants to retain its monopoly within the NHS. But Big Pharma drugs are failing, and failing badly. And like most wounded animals, it attacks those it is most fearful of - and homeopathy fits this bill. As Harvey Bigelsen, MD, says:

"What is common among the (CAM) professions ... is that they cost far less than drugs, surgery, imaging, and laboratory tests. The AMA, through its state medical boards, in conjunction with the FDA and other local, state, and federal agencies, keeps a close eye on these practitioners in case they might claim to "cure," "diagnose," "treat," or "prescribe." Each profession noted has, at one time or another, experienced relentless legal pursuit. Any non-drug sold in this country must follow strict rules about labeling to avoid suggesting any "medical" or "health" benefit.

Only ConMed can do this - and they signally fail to do so. So their attacks are not undertaken from a position of strength, but a position of weakness. Big Pharma companies, and their apologists may have a lot of wealth and influence. But they have no ability to 'treat' or 'cure' illness. Homeopathy does.

The Failure of Conventional Medicine (4)

2011-11-14T15:03:00.000Z

Big Pharma does not want you to know about the damage their drugs and vaccines cause to our lives. They want us to keep taking the medicine. regardless of the consequences. They seem intent on maintaining their profitability, regardless of the human consequences. The conventional medical (ConMed) Establishment, including most GPs, also refuse to tell us about the dangers of the drugs and vaccines they prescribe to use

This is a must-see internet article, which includes 3 videos: it is entitled 'What Vaccines can do to normal, healthy children'.
Drugs cause disease (as well as death), and there are many well-known examples of this. But with vaccines, this evidence can be dramatically witnessed. Child Health Safety have recently published an article that features 3 videos, prepared by parents who saw their 'normal' children permanently damaged shortly after taking vaccines. How does Big Pharma, and its apologists respond. Often with silence. Often with dismissal - that these cases are 'anacdotal'. Often with denial - there is no evidence linking the drug/vaccine with the result. And often with over-emphasising the seriousness of the illness the drug/vaccine is supposed to overcome. Rarely, unless seriously cornered, is Big Pharma, or the ConMed Establishment that supports it, prepared to remove the drug/vaccine in the interests of patient safety. So watch these videos, and see whether you agree with the parents - or the medical authorities!

Children who have been vaccinated have been found to have from 2 to 5 times more diseases and ailments than unvaccinated children. I have been told that this research is 'not sound' - to which my response is -why is the ConMed Establishment not doing its own research on the impact of vaccines on the health of our children. And of course, rubbishing 'negative' research is a regular part of Big Pharma's defence when they are accused of making us sick.

But regardless of the quality of some studies on the harm caused by ConMed drugs, the suspicions remain. Not least, the link between vaccines and Autism. This article suggests that vaccinated children are 20 times more likely to become Autistic. But the article does much more than this. It looks at the evidence for an increase risk of Allergies, Asthma, Hayfever, ADHD, middle-ear infections, and Sinusitis - and in each finds that vaccinated children fare worse than unvaccinated children.

Avandia is another drug that has cause massive problems. Recently, one Big Pharma company has paid out $3 billion in settlement for the way the drug was developed and marketed. Basically, they knew that this drug caused heart disease - but did not tell anyone. Note that this is a Reuters (News Agency) report. Yet the news has gone almost unreported in the mainstream media, who apparently don't consider that the safety of patients is something that should concern them. This is not unusual. There is a steady stream of litigation in the USA courts, regularly handing out heavy fines to Big Pharma companies. And mostly, they remain unreported. ConMed is failing - but we are the last to hear about it. To quote Reuters, who outlines some of these cases:

Since 2000 the number of industry settlements with U.S. states and the federal government has soared as authorities have taken an increasingly tough line on practices that may have put commercial goals above the interests of payers and patients, such as marketing drugs for unapproved uses.

Psychotropic drugs cause psychosis and death? This category of drug includes Prozac, Paxil, Ritalin, Haldol, Risperdal - and many more. They are known to cause heart attacks, diabetes, and sudden death, whilst on the mental side, they are known to cause insomnia and anxiety - but are also implicated in suicide, and violence - including murder amongst 'traumatized combat veterans.

Prostate cancer drugs can spur the growth of prostate cancer cells? Hearing about ConMed drugs that exacerbate the very condition they are given for is, unfortunately, not unusual. This article is, apparently, very topical at the moment - with a 'moustache growing' campaign currently in operation to develop awareness of prostate cancer. Is this a good thing? Well, not if the money raised through charitable donations go towards developing more dangerous Big Pharma drugs! Or, indeed, raising the profile of prostate cancer on the basis of a medical scare story. What is becoming clear is that prostate cancer is contracted by most men over the age of 50, and that most of them will outlive it naturally. Taking ConMed drugs, it would appear, is the way to ensure that you don't!

Another thing to beware of is that many health charities raise money to donate to Big Pharma specifically for the development of new drugs. And most of these charities get major funding from Big Pharma companies as a result. So before supporting any medical charity, first find out its connections with such powerful vested commercial interests that have profit, rather than your health, as their primary objective.

And we should not expect that the drug regulators will stand up to protect patients from dangerous Big Pharma drugs. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) are currently facing a fraud investigation. This article is taken from the appropriately named organisation "What Doctors Don't Tell You" - and of course, we are unlikely to hear about this from doctors, the NHS, the Department of Health, the government. The diabetes drug, Mediator, had been on the European market for 33 years. It was withdrawn in 2009, after being implicated in about 2,000 deaths. Yet the problems associated with the drug, it caused fatal heart problems, had been known about for over 10 years. The EMA was formed in 1995 to harmonise drug regulation in the EY. You will not be surprised that 80% of its funding comes from the Big Pharma companies.

Another regulatory agency, in the USA, the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been found to have deliberately manipulated and covered up the relationship between Thimerosal in vaccines and Autism. In 2003, the journal Pediatrics, published a study from Denmark that observed a significant decline in autism rates following the elimination of Thimerosal in vaccines. "But thanks to the CDCs corrupting influece, the published version of the study .... actually claimed the opposite, and alleged that removal of Thimerosal brought about an increase in autism rates". It would appear that anything is possible within the world of Big Pharma drugs and vaccines, and that the only casualty are the patients who take these drugs without having full information about them.

But this is not the only problem facing the CDC at the moment. There is an investigation into how this government backed organisation is spending US taxpayers money. "Although the CDC's main mission is supposed to be to prevent disease, a shocking investigation from Congress claims the profiteering agency has been squandering hundreds of millions of your tax dollars on Hollywood scripts, posh fitness clubs and amenities, parties and more".

And the former head of CDC, Julie Berberding (2002-2009), who was removed from her $250,000 post by President Obama, moved straight into a post with the Big Pharma giant, Merck, on a salary of $2,500,000. This article from Tim Bolen states that Berberding re-organised the CDC to help promote vaccines. If so, it appears to have been a profitable move for her. Berberding's other claim to fame, apparently, was that she refused to respond with full disclosure following a Freedom of Information request - which apparently would have revealed that the CDC knew about the dangers of vaccines many years ago.

Given all this, it is perhaps little wonder that it can take decades before the dangers of the drugs and vaccines we are offered are fully known. For instance, Amalgam contains mercury, and dentists have been putting this most-toxic of all poisons in our mouths for many decades now. How many of you have amalgam fillings in your mouth? Probably, most of us, especially if we visited the dentist during the 1970's and 1980's, when dentist were paid according to how many fillings they gave us! So whilst it is good to hear that there are signs that in the USA, amalgam fillings may soon be banned. Amalgam has been around for over 3 decades - and whilst moves may be afoot to ban its use in the the USA, in the UK there appears to be no such movement.

So how can the patient ensure that he or she is is safe, and not taking dangerous Big Pharma drugs? The answer becomes clear with just a little thought. Are we likely to be told by Government, the Department of Health, the NHS, or our own GP? Are drug regulators actively regulating drugs in the interests of patients?Are we likely to be warned about dangers of drugs and vaccines by the mainstream media? Are the drugs we are being prescribed today likely to be any better than the drugs we were taking 10 years ago, and which are now banned?

The answer, of course, is an emphatic 'No' to all this. Which can lead us to only one proper conclusion. We are all better off refusing to take any Big Pharma's drugs and vaccines, and instead, to look for safer alternatives.

We Are What We Eat (1)

2011-11-10T16:03:00.001Z

The idea behind the phrase 'you are what you eat' is that in order to be healthy you need to eat a 'good' diet. The origins of that phrase itself was to reinforce what is self-evident - that the quality of the food we eat has an enormous bearing on our state of mind, and on our health.

Hitherto, I have not ventured into this arena. I am not a nutritionist. But like all of us, we should be aware of the quality of food and drink that we consume. And for most of us, we are not as fully aware, and certainly not as fully informed, as we should be. Much of what we eat and drink is not good for us, or our state of mind, or our health. Some is positively dangerous. And the situation is not improving, ideed, it is probably getting worse.

And the reasons are similar to the situation regarding dangerous Big Pharma drugs. Big Food, the massive food processing industries, are providing food which, for a variety of reasons, are not good for us. They are usually cheap; they usually come alongside considerable advertising. But the foods are processed in a way that boosts Big Food's profits, but is bad for our health.

And there is the same uncanny silence from the mainstream media towards 'Big Food' as there is to 'Big Pharma' - there would appear to be a cosy relationship between the Corporate Giants in the Food, Pharmaceutical and Media industries.

Aspartame and artificial sweeteners
Intensive farming and soil quality
Herbicides and pesticides
GM Food
The fluoridation of water supply

These all have an impact on our health, especially if they are eaten regularly, and in quantity.

And then there are foods that can actually assist us maintain our health - usually simple foods, and often readily available - so they do not generate profit - and therefore the attention they deserve.

YAWYE will become another regular feature of this blog; and if you would like to follow some of the stories, please make sure you are joined up, and receive notifications of new blogs.

Healthy Medicine (3)

2011-11-07T15:34:00.000Z

This newsletter was originally published on the blog of the Alliance of Registered Homeopaths. http://arh.blogspot.com. If you have not already subscribed, or if you want a weekly email reminder of publication, please do so now.

Why is homeopathy increasingly popular? Well, there are many reason. The core reason is that homeopathy is both safe to use, and (with the right remedy) effective with any ailment or disease. In fact, an increasing number of people are buying over-the-counter remedies, as this article shows. And this brings in a third reason - homeopathy is not expensive.

Homeopathy cures where Allopathy fails. Are you being treated with conventional medicine, have been for years, and you are no better? Many people turn to homeopathy at this point of their lives.....

Homeopathy is helpful for a whole range of conditions - read these articles

Homeopathy and the treatment of women during Menopause. Look at this article, to see why homeopathy is both safer, and more effective than conventional treatment - especially HRT treatment.

Homeopathy and Bedwetting. This article explains the background to the problem, and provides information on some of the remedies that can be used for the condition.

And for incontinence more generally, a wider approach can be found here.

Homeopathy and Claustrophobia.

Homeopathy and Influenza (flu).

Homeopathy and Epilepsy - a personal story.

Homeopathy, digestion and constipation. Another personal story.

And some practical thoughts on practising homeopathy with animals.

Blockages in Homeopathy. Have you ever wondered why homeopathic remedies do not always work? The concept of 'blockage' is widely discussed within the homeopathic community, and is usefully explained in this article.

And finally, an interview with two of homeopathy's living greats - first, Robin Murphy. And second, Miranda Castro (and in particular the cream she uses for scars and keloids). Find out in these two articles just what learning, expertise, experience and thought goes into the homeopathy profession.

Is there a homeopath living near you? Go to this link if you want to find a professional registered homeopath who practices near you.

The Failure of Conventional Medicine (3)

2011-11-07T13:57:00.000Z

The dishonesty of the Conventional Medical Establishment is not widely appreciated or understood. Doctors (GPs) are usually found to be one of the most trusted professions. They would not intentionally give us drugs that cause disease and death - would they? Indeed, most would not, but unfortunately they are at the very end of a long trail of corruption, deceit, and dishonesty that can be found in the following internet articles - although, of course, the mainstream media refuse to report them to us.

How the medical monopoly hides inconvenient vaccines truths is a good place to start. What is not reported in the media is as important as what is reported. And what has become clear to me over the last few years is that the mainstream media is not interested in providing us with any evidence that runs counter to what ConMed wants us to know.

Media control is highly valued by Big Pharma and other monopolistic cartels. Since the 1970s, centralized media ownership, CIA intervention, and federally sanctioned pharmaceutical advertising have made owning the media easier for Big Pharma.

As Dr Mercola says in this article, for over a century Big Pharma have created and enjoyed a lucrative monopoly in health care. And they have done it by forming alliances with doctors, politicians, and scientists both within and outside government. So it is not just a medical monopoly we fight - it is a government sponsored monopoly. So what happens when people begin to refuse to 'take the medicine'? Government seeks to force them on us. And in doing so, they take our medical liberties away from us, and force medication on us.

The Media speaks for Big Pharma. Well, it certainly does not speak up for patients. Statin drugs are now known to cause many disease-inducing-effects (DIEs), yet the Media not only refuses to tell us about this, they continue to tell us how good they are - now, apparently, they protect us from Prostate Cancer! The mainstream media have become publicists for BigPharma - propagandists who are willing to publish ConMed news releases without comment or criticism - and fearful of printing the truth.

The reason for the silence of Government and the Media is that Big Pharma is very profitable. The huge profits made from selling drugs are used to ensure that little of nothing is known about the dangers of these drugs. We, and patients throughout the world, are meant to be no more than consumers.

The 'Occupy' movements throughout the world, including at St Paul's in London, are campaigning against the power of Big Corporations, and the influence they have on our daily lives. This video explains why Big Pharma companies are probably the most dangerous of these big corporate groups - threatening not only our health, but increasingly, our health liberties. Whilst banking may be the focus of media attention, it is Big Pharma that has control of our government, and is making enforced medication an ever-increasing possibility.

And Big Pharma does not just want to sell their drugs to you - they want to stop you having access to homeopathy (and any other alternative medical therapy) too. Just look at this article, from the GP magazine, to see how Boots in being attacked by ConMed apologists! The movement to stop us getting access to vitamins and supplements is now operational throughout the world. The monopoly wishes to extend its monopoly.

So let's now have a look at some of the articles about what we are not being told about the health services offered to us by Big Pharma, ConMed, the NHS - and our doctors.

On blood pressure, or hypertension drugs? Then look at this video.

Did you know that overdosing on painkilling drugs have tripled in 10 years?

Has anyone told you that Contraceptive pills are linked to breast cancer?

Recently, we have had 'breast cancer awareness week' - but this article tells you of a darker side. And a more positive side which you are less likely to hear about. Guess which side prescription drugs lay on!

And Antibiotics? Contrary to what we have been told for over 50 years, antibiotics are not all they have said to be (and this is a fairly mild critique)

And has anyone told you that routine hospital treatments can cause heart attacks?

And if you have heart disease, it seems best to steer clear of drugs ConMed gives you to treat it. Especially, it would seem, if you are a dog!

The evidence against vaccines is growing by the day, although you won't realise this if you obtain your information from the mainstream media. The Greater Good is a long video that seeks to take a 'balanced' view of vaccination. If you are thinking of taking, or allowing your children to take any form of vaccines, please, please look at this first!

And so it goes on, a medical monopoly, out of control, but in control of governments and politicians, a monopoly that has little or nothing to do with good health. We are not well-served by this medical monopoly, or its complacent allies in Government and the mainstream Media.

If you are concerned about this situation, ensure you see next weeks edition of this newsletter, when more evidence from the internet will be brought together and revealed. Better still, why not subscribe to this blog, and get an email each week to let you know when it has been published.

Homeopathy Heals Newsletter (2)

2011-11-01T12:29:00.000Z

Homeopathy - so safe - so effective - so inexpensive. It is a gift! And contained herein, our weekly newsletter gives some examples as to why this is.

Here is why one nurse decided to become a homeopath. Her story can be repeated many times over; and it all has to do with the discovery that homeopathy is, indeed, a gift.

The Royal Families of Europe, especially the UK family, have certainly appreciated the gift of homeopathy. This article shows how Royalty throughout Europe have benefitted, and the conditions they have been treated for.

And so, if would appear, do the people of India. George Vithoulkas describes here the stunning growth of homeopathy on this sub-continent.

Homeopathy really is timeless, and without limit - as this article suggests. Something of the history of homeopathy here.

Homeopathy and the treatment of Illness

Rhinitis - and how to cope with it. There are URLs to 4 different sites that deal with the subject here.

Alopecia and baldness. Usually we are told, or we assume, that nothing can be done for this condition. But there are remedies that can help, as this article suggests - and describes some of the remedies.

If you suffer from insomnia, you don't be tired all the time. This article suggests how homeopathy might help, including some useful remedy descriptions.

Homeopathy and your eyes. There are 10 remedy descriptions in this useful article.

Sciatica and Homeopathy relief. Sciatica can be very painful, and whilst ConMed can only offer temporary pain relief, homeopathy offers so much more than this.

Homeopathy is very safe. And it is possible to take a remedy if the description of that remedy appears to closely match your symptoms. But despite this it is always better to refer yourself to a qualified homeopath so that the selection of remedy to match your condtion can be made more accurately.
If you are looking for a homeopath who lives near you click on this page to do a search.

Some Homeopathy Remedies

The use, and over-use of Arnica. Arnica is perhaps the most well-known remedy available through homeopathy. It's value in bruising, trauma and shock, have been known for over 200 years. Click here for another view.

Oscillocochinum - a remedy for flu. This is the remedy I, and my family, take to ward off flu during the winter period. It is an excellent remedy.

And gardeners, how about this remedy - for your plants? The remedy Silica has many uses both for plants, and the soils they grow in. I recently brought an Olive tree back to life after our hard winter - with Carbo Veg - so I know how effective homeopathy is with plants.

This newsletter was originally published at http://arh.blogspot.com/2011/10/homeopathy-heals-2.html. Why not sign up to this blog too?

The Failure of Conventional Medicine (2)

2011-10-31T14:38:00.001Z

The medicines that we are given to improve our health, or to make us better, actually make us sicker than we were before we took them. In fact, conventional medical (ConMed) drugs actually cause disease, and death. And we are not being told about this. Hence this regular weekly newspaper - which will bring you articles from the internet which will inform you about what is happening, when you GP, the NHS, the Dept of Health, and the mainstream media refuse to do so.

Fosamax can cause severe fractures of the femur, and brittle bones. Fosamax is a drug used for Osteoporosis, and if you are not careful, doctors will still prescribe it for you. In the USA, there is actually a condition called 'Fossy-Jaw' which causes the disintegration of the jaw. Fosamax is also known to be bad for your heart, your liver and your stomach.

Psychoactive Drugs are the cause of most Mental Illness? The facts given in this article are quite astounding, and certainly deeply worrying at the time when Mental Health problems are reaching epidemic proportions. For example, did you know that in 2007 the number of disabled mentally-ill children had increased 35 times since 1990?

Asthma drugs may actually increase the risk of asthma attacks. So not only has the number of children suffering from Asthma increased over recent decades, the drug taken and inhaled by those children are probably make the situation worse.

Even drugs like Statins, which we have been told are 'entirely safe' for decades, are now known to be unsafe. This article outlines the case against Statin drugs, and suggests that heart failure, pneumonia, nerve damage - and many other diseases can be contracted by people, the increasing numbers of people, who take them believing them to be safe.

But surely antibiotics are safe? Well, no, they are not. Researchers have now discovered that a common antibiotic is a killer! It has been found to cause a range of life-threatening reactions, including liver failure, and hypoglycaemia.

So what about painkillers? Common painkillers. This article, by the appropriately named organisation 'What doctor's don't tell you' (WDDTY) suggests that certain NSAID painkillers may become another Vioxx. (Vioxx, if you had not heard, is thought to have caused about 140,000 heart attacks, and 60,000 deaths before it was withdrawn).

And did you know that some flu vaccine has been withdrawn in Scotland? Well, it was not exactly well publicised! The vaccine was withdrawn because it was causing "a higher than normal frequency of adverse reactions". You can see, by reading the article, how officials have dismissed this withdrawal as unimportant!

Probably a worse situation has arisen in Australia regarding the flu vaccines. This article says that Australia's drug regulator is demanding an explanation from the drug manufacturer "after it emerged the company knew two years ago about research suggesting a sharp rise in fevers linked to its seasonal flu vaccine, but omitted this from information given to doctors".

Actually, the withholding of vital information about drugs from patients (and doctors too) seems to be quite routine within the world of ConMed. I mentioned the painkilling drug Vioxx, above. The disease-inducing-effects (DIEs) of this drug were known about by the drug company long before the incidents of heart failures and deaths were made public.

Indeed, prescription drugs are now so dangerous they are killing more people than so-called 'illegal' drugs. Perhaps on this basis, prescription drugs should be made illegal.

But, of course, they won't be. ConMed drugs are too profitable for the Big Pharma drug companies. And Big Pharma companies have far too much influence over governments, national health services, drug regulatory bodies, and even our GPs and doctors. So we don't get to know.

However, you may well hear plenty of attacks on homeopathy - or, indeed, any other medical therapy that is safer, and more effective than this awful drug-based medicine. The reason for this is obvious. ConMed is failing. People are beginning to realise it is failing. And an increasing number of people are looking for alternative way of treating their illnesses, and remaining well. From Big Pharma's point of view, this is not good - it will damage their profitability!

What we are dealing with here is a system of medicine that is failing its patients. But it is a system of medicine that is so profitable, so influential and powerful within the political and medical establishment, that we are not being told about it.

For much more information about the ongoing failure of ConMed drugs and vaccines, look here.

ConMed and the creation of illness.

Filling the Holes: Homeopathy Deserves a Place in Cancer Treatment

2011-10-28T14:22:00.000+01:00

Thanks to Allison Brooks for this blog. Allison describes herself "a recent college graduate and a holistic health nut" who is very passionate about enlightening people about the benefits natural therapies can have on multiple diseases and illnesses. Well, there are not enough of these sorts of people around! So here is her first blog.

Homeopathy is the oldest form of medicine around. Before there were “white-coat doctors” and hospitals, there was nature. Nature provided and still provides everything needed to sustain life. Nature gives life, food, water, and health. But as time goes on, humans separate themselves with nature more and more, and the trust in using natural remedies is nonexistent. But, if people looked at the facts, their trust in conventional therapies and medications would diminish.

This is where the example of “filling the holes” comes in; what better way to explain a medical therapy from nature, than with an analogy from nature. Holes do not form themselves; either someone must dig a hole, or the soil composition is weak and then slumps to form a hole. If a conventional cancer therapy were to see this problem, it would simply fill the hole, only to see it re-appear in the future. But if a homeopathic consultant saw the hole, he/she would consider how the hole formed and then fix that problem or soil-imbalance to prevent the hole from recurring.

Since conventional therapies focus only on the treatment of symptoms, like a tumor or growth, the underlying bodily imbalances go un-noticed. If the imbalance or root of the problem is not treated, then the problem will continue to arise. This is where homeopathy steps in. Using what is Nature supplies and following the law of similars, homeopathy has proven to be a vital force in the fight against cancer.

There is much proof that using homeopathy with cancer treatments actually improves recovery time and reduces the chance of recurrence. Many doctors have recognized that fighting cancer with a multiple-layered approach tends to work the best. Nurturing the body, while using conventional therapies, promotes strength, stamina, and the well-being to combat the cancer with full-force. Doctors that are devoted to treating aggressive cancer or ones with a low-survivability rate, like non-hodgkin’s lymphoma or pericardial mesothelioma, encouraged the use of homeopathy, or another alternative therapy, with cancer treatment. Many hospitals even offer the use of in-house homeopathic consultants or alternative therapy practitioners.

Homeopathy Heals Newsletter (1)

2011-10-28T13:41:00.001+01:00

First of all, my apologies to the hundreds of people who have subscribed to Homeopathy Post, http://paper.li/f-1309429178 over the last 4-5 months. The host site proved to be extremely unreliable in picking up the articles that I highlighted for publication, and last week, it failed to pick up any of the 25-30 articles I had selected. This is our new host website, and you can subscribe to this forum by clicking on 'Join this site' to the right of this text.

This is the first of what will be a weekly selection of articles from the internet about what is happening within the wonder world of homeopathy.

Homeopathy and the Quantum World
Homeopathy has been under attack by a group of people who call themselves 'skeptics', but who we call 'denialists'' - because they do nothing but deny the safety and effectiveness of homeopathy. This article is the experience on one 'convert' to homeopathy, and his view of the denialists. It is an excellent article and I recommend that you read it.

The Rejection of Alternative Medicine is 'unscientific'
But don't worry about attacks on homeopathy. This article tells why ConMed is attacking all non-drug therapies - without any scientific backing. As it says, "the mainstream medical establishment's rejection of alternative healing flies in the face of hundreds, or even thousands of years of history, but it also flies in the face of good science".

Peter Hain - a homeopathy supporter
A remarkable politician, who discovered homeopathy when his son had eczema. ConMed treatment did not work. Homeopathy did. Peter Hain commissioned a project on homeopathy when he was Northern Ireland Secretary. It was a remarkably successful project. Doctors liked it. Patients liked it. And the report is now collecting dust in the Department of Health.

The long term impact of homeopathy treatment
ConMed drug treatment lasts just a few hours before having to take another noxious pill. So what are the long-term effects of homeopathy? This study finds that 'disease severity decreased significantly'; and that 'physical and mental quality of life scores also increased significantly.

Homeopathy and Weight Loss (Obesity)
An article looking at the reasons for obesity, and detailing some remedies that can be helpful for patients who want to lose weight.

Homeopathy worked for me. A case of Sciatica
Watch this video, describing how homeopathy cured a case of Sciatica. This is one of a series of short videos on U-Tube on this theme.

And click here if you would like to see a wider appraisal of how homeopathy can help to treat Sciatica.

Homeopathy and Constipation
Natural remedies for constipation can be found in this article.

Homeopathy works for animals (and farmers) too
Farmers who use homeopathy for their animals have resented remarks, fairly ignorant but quite predictable remarks, made by MPs and others, about a grant to investigate the value of homeopathy in the treatment of animals. Note, their opposition is about trials to assess how effective homeopathy is - so these MPs, and other homeopathy denialists, are not sufficiently open-minded to want to know the truth!

Homeopathy for farms, gardens and plants
And homeopathy works for plants too. The author of this book advised me about an Olive Tree I had in my garden that appeared to have died; and after a dose of Carbo Veg, it is alive and kicking still.

The uses of Saccharum Officinale.
Not the most common remedy - but read about its value in treating Hypoglycaemia, ADHD, Obesity, and much else.

The Failure of Conventional Medicine (1)

2011-10-27T12:19:00.000+01:00

Conventional medicine (ConMed) is failing because it is both ineffective and highly dangerous for patients. Yet, the public are not being given the evidence of this catastrophic failure. Governments, National Health Services throughout the world, doctors, and perhaps most alarmingly of all, the mainstream media, are failing to tell us about the gross failings of the ConMed Establishment, and of Big Pharma drugs in particular.

Each week, this blog will collect together a series of articles from the internet that demonstrate this failure, and the underlying reason for an increasing number of people looking for non-drug medical therapies that are both safer and more effective.

Big Pharma drugs - the new epidemic sweeping across America (and Europe too)?
Did you know, for instance, that Big Pharma prescription drugs now kill more people than illegal drugs? Indeed, ConMed drugs has become the biggest single cause of death in the USA.

Fresh doubts over flu vaccines
Click on this link if you did not know about the increasing doubts about the safety and effectiveness of flu vaccine we are all being exorted to take. No such doubts have been seen in the mainstream media - we have just been told of the benefits of the vaccine? Did you know, for example, that whilst doctor's might be recommending you to have the vaccine, doctor's themselves, in huge numbers, are refusing to have one?

Show us the evidence for the flu jab.
In fact, doctors are even asking the government, who are criticising them, to provide them with the evidence that the flu vaccine is effective.

Flu vaccines effective in 1.5% cases - not 60% as we have been told
The concern about the effectiveness of the flu vaccine is shown in this 'shock vaccine study'! A shock, of course, only if you have not discovered the truth about ConMed, and the length's Big Pharma will go to sell their drugs.

Flu? There is a better defence
And why aren't we all being told that there are better, safer, more effective alternatives to flu vaccines?

20 Vaccine 'Trivia' Facts
Of course, vaccines have never been safe. No vaccine. Is this right? Have a look at this article from Vactruth, which outlines just 20 examples when vaccines have proven to be either useless, dangerous, or both. Vactruth is one of the foremost websites investigating the dangers of vaccines, and seeking to educate a misinformed public.

US Government Agency has known all along how dangerous vaccines are
Or perhaps look at this, from Tim Bolen's website, frightening evidence that government agencies know about the dangers of vaccines, but haven't been prepared to tell us.

Vaccines and the increasing rate of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Cancer
This sort of negative evidence about vaccines, though, is coming out all the time though - so we don't have to look at the history of vaccine cover-ups in order to know that they are linked with patient harm, and the increasing rate of diseases of all kinds.

Healthy babies given dangerous and unnecessary drugs
Or, how often are we told about Big Pharma giving us drugs when we do not need them? And it would appear that not even healthy babies are not safe.

ADHD Drugs are a common source of drug reaction.
Of course, children are more susceptible to the disease-inducing-effects of drugs, and this link states that ADHD medication cause substantial adverse reactions in children.

NHS Breast Screening programme under review
And it is not just drugs that are a problem. What about useless tests that lead to taking toxic drugs - unnecessarily? Well, the BBC did report on this (26th October 2011). But the point it not just that the test is 'being questioned' but that lot's of women, who did not need treatment for breast cancer, received it - despite its toxicity and dangers. Of course, in their reporting, the BBC did not focus on this, or inform us about the dangers (and sheer nastiness) of ConMed cancer treatment.

Pfizer pays $14.5 million to settle Detrol off-label suit
So do Big Pharma tell us that their drugs are dangerous? Of course not, they are in business to make money by selling drugs. Big Pharma companies are regularly paying out $millions of dollars in compensation for the dangerous drugs they provide for patients. In some parts of the more litigious world, they abound. And if you want more - here is another example (there are many, many more). My question is - shouldn't patients be told before they are harmed by such drugs? But again, we rarely, if ever, hear about these dangers.

So why the cover-up - by government? By government health agencies? By the NHS? By ConMed medics? And above all, by the mainstream media? Why do we not hear about these compensation payments? And, indeed, who pays to set up these cover-up's?

On BBC Radio, on 25th October 2011, I heard a programme discussing the cost of treatment for Macular Degeneration. One treatment, they said, was cheaper, but it had 'side-effects'. However, not once did the programme tell the listeners what the 'side-effects' of this drug (Avastin) were!

The BBC, like most of the mainstream media, does this all the time - it salutes new wonder drugs - but never tells us about the damage drugs do to us. The question is - why? Who is controlling the BBC? Here are a couple of articles on the subject that the BBC certainly did not use.

Can using Avastin for Macular Degeneration cause blindness?
So Avastin can cause blindness? Yes, a drug used for a condition that can cause blindness is actually being treated by a drug that causes blindness! Somehow, this does not seem to be a good deal - at any price! This is especially so as Avastin has also been associated with causing fatal brain inflammation!

Macular Degeneration affects nearly 15 million Americans leading patients to seek alternative healthcare solutions
Nor, of course, did the BBC say anything about alternative treatments. This article states that there are 15 million people with Macular Degeneration in the USA alone - and that many people are seeking alternative therapy. The article focuses on Acupuncture - but homeopathy, and many other therapies, are a safer alternative to Avastin.

Insomnia Drugs linked to 36% increase in death

2011-10-19T15:53:00.000+01:00

It has been calculated that people who use drugs to aid sleep do sleep longer. About 11 minutes longer, each night.

Is it worth it?

The Health Services Institute (HSI) in a recent newsletter reminded us that many sleeping drugs cause dangerous adverse reactions - like sleep-walking, sleep-driving, and sleep-cooking. But HSI say they are much worse than this, and quote a psychiatrist, Dr Kripke.

"The use of sleeping pills, including zolpidem [the generic name for Zolfresh and Ambien], is associated with higher mortality, and there are 18 studies that show that."

So is it worth it? Researchers have shown that powerful sleeping drugs cause death by inhibiting the respiratory and central nervous system, and by impairing alertness, co-ordination and reaction time.

So unless you want to boost the profits of Big Pharma companies, sleeping drugs are best avoided.

"Medications for Insomnia or Anxiety Linked to 36% Increase in Mortality Risk" Laurie Barclay, M.D., Medscape, 10/5/10, medscape.com

Parents call for ban on family of antibiotics

2011-09-28T11:00:00.000+01:00

I bet most of you thought that antibiotics were entirely safe! Well they are not (several antibiotics have been withdrawn or banned in the past because they have been found to be dangerous. This blog is taken from the aptly named magazine, "What Doctors Don't Tell You". This is a valuable source of information on what we, as patients, are never told by the ConMed Establishment, and I certainly recommend that you take out a subscription for this magazine.

"Patients are pressing for a complete ban on a family of antibiotics that can kill or cause blindness and heart disaese. Yet, despite these alarming - and well-known - reactions doctors continue to prescribe them every day.

Fluoroquinolones or quinolones - which include antibiotics such as Cipro, Legaquin, Avelox, Tequin, Trovan and Raxar - arre the most toxic and dangerous drugs on the market today, says David Fuller, who runs a website to support others who, like himself, have been harmed by these drugs. He was been left with partial vision and permanent damage to his joints after taking one of the antibiotics for pneumonia in 1986.

Fuller says that no one is recoding the numbers of deaths and serious adverse reactions caused by the drugs, and he believes the problem is far worse than regulators are admittin. So far, five fluoroquinolones have been taken off the market after they were found to cause fatal heart problems.
www.fqresearch.org

Please go to the website for more horrifying details on what Big Pharma, and ConMed is doing to us - and not telling us!

Homeopathy Politics and Liberty

2011-09-26T11:26:00.000+01:00

The more homeopathy denialists attack homeopathy, the more we should all ask the question - what is it all about. The latest attack comes from part of the Conventional Medical (ConMed) Establishment - the BMJ. Dr Brian Kaplan has written an apt response to this gratuitous attack - and I am blogging it here as it speaks so well about what is happening. I agree with Brian completely - this is an attack on our liberty. And it is an attack supported and funded by the sectional, and vested interests of the Big Pharmaceutical companies.

"The denialists, detractors and critics of homeopathy were back in action this week. In a critical letter to the BMJ protesting against the Government seeking advice (sic) from experts on the registration of homeopathic products. Referring to homeopathy as ‘naked quackery’ and ‘pseudoscience’, the letter was written by Susan Bewley (an obstetrician) ‘on behalf’ of a list of names including the usual suspects, Ernst, Baum, Rose etc.) It seems the letter section of the BMJ has become a popular forum for these doctors to spout their vituperative, amateur homilies on medical politics.

So let us look at the history of the politics of homeopathy in the UK. It is important to acknowledge that throughout its history homeopathy has been attacked for the same reasons: Dilutions, implausibility, quackery and now ‘pseudoscience’, ‘bad science’ etc.

19^th Century: Dr F. Quin studies homeopathy in Germany, brings it to the UK, treats the Prince of Wales and builds the London Homeopathic Hospital. Several other homeopathic hospitals are built in England and Scotland.

1948: The NHS is formed and all the homeopathic hospitals are INVITED to become part of it. This is the reason why homeopathy (unlike aother forms of CAM) is so strongly integrated into the NHS. Homeopathic doctors and their benefactors had built hospitals staffed by doctors specialising in homeopathic treatment prior to the formation of the NHS.

1948-1990: Homeopathy becomes more and more popular both on the NHS and in private medicine. However the opposition movement becomes more determined to end NHS homeopathy. They attack on two main fronts: PR & Media and direct political attack. On the media front, The Guardian newspaper and the supposedly neutral BBC prove to be particularly useful allies to their cause but in the realm of official politics they suffer serious defeats.
December 2009 Political Defeat I: The denialists manage to get a Science and Technology Subcommittee to do an ‘Evidence Check’ on homeopathy. The controversial hearings (signed by very few of the MPs who were meant to take part in it), is addressed by Mike O’Brien the then Minister of Health in the Labour government. He famously describes the draconian anti-homeopathic suggestions of the Committee as ‘illiberal’ and makes it clear that GPs and local health authorities are best placed to decide if their patients should get NHS homeopathy or not.
July 2010: Political Defeat II: The report (with its authoritarian anti-homeopathic and anti-democratic recommendations) passes to the new Coalition Government for consideration. The new Health Minister, Anne Milton thanks the S&T Committee for their work but then kicks all their reccomendations into touch. Her reasons for doing so are much the same as the Labour minister’s: GPs and localhealth authorities should be trusted to make the best decisions for their patients. An infuriated Michael Baum pores scorn on her in a well-publicised letter to the Lancet concluding with a condescending “Shame on you Minister!” I was personally astonished by the aggressive, rant-like nature of this letter as Baum had only a few months before called for the debate on homeopathy to return to the ‘realm of polite disputation’.

So summing up:
Government under Labour: supported homeopathy on the NHS.

Government under Coalition: reiterated this support almost to the letter.

Head of State and family: are known to use and have used homeopathy for several generations.

The detractors, denialists and illiberal, wannabe Statist authoritarians have tried to thwart GPs (rather than dissuade them which would at least be respectable) from referring patients for NHS homeopathy by insisting that their scientism trump due democratic process – but it hasn’t worked. Despite what Ben Goldacre writes in the Guardian, despite the letters to BMJ and Lancet, and despite inexplicable and inexcusable BBC bias against homeopathy, both Labour and Coalition Governments have seen fit to protect the significant minority support for homeopathy in the UK as well as the rights of British GPs to send their own patients for NHS homeopathy if they so wish. In doing so Government has so far managed to resist a serious, concerted attempt to undermine the democratic provision of health care in this country.

The attack on homeopathy has been a veritable Pandora’s Box of vitriol and bias that has certainly damaged British homeopathy by it’s sheer persistence and seemingly well-funded mass pressure at a PR level. It is heartening to know that at least at a pure political level, there has been unequivocal support by both Labour and the Coalition not only for homeopathy, but for something equally as important – liberal democracy itself. Fortunately the last thing to come out of this particular Pandora’s Box was still Hope.

Common Pain Killers lead to Heart problems

2011-09-23T11:47:00.000+01:00

It is interesting to compare what ConMed authorities tell us about drugs, and what they refuse to tell us. The Health Sciences Institute has done just this in a recent newsletter (to receive their newsletter, well worthwhile, go to their website at http://www.thehealthierlife.co.uk/.

"Higher daily dose of aspirin could play key role in preventing heart attacks for those with diabetes."

That is the kind of 'good' news we so often hear from the NHS, which is so readily peddled in the mainstream media.
Higher daily dose of aspirin could play key role in preventing heart attacks for those with diabetes" University of Alberta press release, 7/5/11, eurekalert.org

What you won't hear is any 'news' to the contrary. For instance, this research will almost certainly not be taken up by GPs, the NHS, or the mainstream media.

"Common Painkillers May Increase Risk of Irregular Heart Rhythm" MyHealthNewsDaily, 7/5/11, myhealthnewsdaily.com

The drugs implicated in this research is not just aspirin, but that whole group of commonly available painkillers called NSAIDs, or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.

"... Danish researchers compared medical records for about 32,000 atrial fibrillation (AF) patients with medical records for more than 320,000 healthy subjects. Results showed that 60 days or more of NSAID use increased AF risk by 40 per cent, and the same amount of COX-2 inhibitor use increased risk by 70 per cent.

AF is associated with the long-term risk of stroke and heart failure - and therefore death. But there are more well-known risk with taking NSAIDs - stomach bleeding - which the American Gastroenterological Association says results in more than 100,000 admissions to hospital each year (and I believe that figure in just the USA).

Nonsteriodal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs)" American Gastroenterological Association, 4/24/10, gastro.org

There are no safe ConMed drugs. The best thing anyone can do is to avoid them - and look for a safer medical therapy.

Indigestion? Don't take drugs!

2011-09-23T10:22:00.000+01:00

Beware, anyone taking acid reflux and heartburn drugs, and thinking they are safe. They may be popular. You may not have been told they can be dangerous. But even the FDA (the US Food and Drugs Administration - the body supposed to protect us from dangerous medical drugs) now admits that they are more dangerous than we have been told.

"Detailed View: Safety Labelling Changes Approved By FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) – May 2011" FDA, fda.gov

The drugs are otherwise known as 'proton pump inhibitors' - yes, another 'inhibitor' that seeks to change the way our body functions, and therefore, causes such harm. They may cause some relief; but at what cost? The Health Sciences Institute gives two reasons why they are dangerous.

1. Contrary to what you have been led to believe, stomach acids are not there just to make your life miserable - they are responsible for digesting food.
2. Stomach acids perform other important tasks, such as protecting your stomach from C-Diff (Clostridium Difficile), a bacterium that can trigger severe digestive inflammation and diarrhoea.

The HSI newsletter goes on to explain that the drugs can cause hypo-magnesia; and state that the FDA is refusing to recognise it. Magnesium deficiency can, of course, ultimately lead to Osteoporosis, and other bone disease.

So, as they say, stomach acid is our friend, not our enemy. And yet Big Pharma wages a drug war against it. The 'war' against on part of our bodily functions causes damage to another part. But then, of course, there are more profitable drugs to wage war on this - causing problems elsewhere.

Big Pharma drugs cause disease, not 'side-effects', or 'adverse reaction' - but disease. So for temporary relief from indigestion, we may end up getting osteoporosis.

ConMed is never a good deal!

Homeopathy and Chickens

2011-09-20T16:58:00.000+01:00

A farmer with over 8,000 free range organic chickens had a serious worm problem. It was untreatable with conventional drugs, and as he was an organic farmer, he had to be careful what he used to treat the hens.

So the farmer went to Crossgates, who, amongst other things, provide remedies for farm animals.
http://www.crossgatesfarm.co.uk/. They supplied the farmer with a remedy, based on taking some feathers from infested chickens (homeopathy = treating like with like), which he then applied to his flock.

The worm vanished, and has not returned in the many months that has elapsed since the treatment.

So it is little wonder that an increasing number of farmers are moving away from conventional veterinary treatment with Big Pharma drugs, with all the dangers, and lack of effectiveness - and above all, the exorbitant costs for farmers.

The conventional treatment of farm animals, of course, a story of many repeating disasters. ConMed drugs are not much good, so when there is an epidemic of a disease, like 'Foot and Mouth', as there was several years ago, the result it that 'treatment' consists of killing animals - both those with the disease, and those who are healthy but might have come into contact with a sick animal.

What sort of medicine is this - that can fail so abysmally - then resort to slaughter - and still call it medicine?

It is the medicine of failure! It is the medicine of profit for Big Pharma. It is a medicine that does farmers no favours, other than large vet bills. The organisation Homoeopathy at Wellie Level is presenting evidence to farmers of the wonderful work that homeopathy is doing for many farmers. They have produced a marvellous newspaper 'This is Homeopathy' which features several farmers who bear testimony to what homeopathy has done for their business. The testimonies are really remarkable - and before reading the newspaper I had no idea that such amazing results could be achieved, in so many areas of farming. The newspaper is in 'pdf' form at the moment. I am trying to get hold of it so that I can post it here.

Please be patient!