Search This Blog

Thursday, 7 November 2019

No wonder our NHS is in constant financial crisis. Doctors know that 12% of patients are harmed by drugs. And they also know the cost!

Regular readers of this blog (follow it to get regular updates of the publication of new blogs) will already know the harm pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines can harm our health. We know all drugs can cause harm, they all have serious side effects. But just how many patients taking a drug will suffer from harmful side effects?

The British Medical Journal might be able to help - and the figure they come up with is staggeringly high. As WDDTY (November 2019) has reported "12% of all patients are harmed by a drug or procedure - and that figure could be higher still as adverse reactions are seriously under-reported". This refers to the BMJ article, published in in July 2019, "Prevalence, severity, and nature of preventable patient harm across medical care settings: systematic review and meta-analysis"

So, yet again, we discover that the conventional medical establishment KNOW the harm they cause to patients, and THE EXTENT of the harm they cause.

WDDTY states that 6% were harmed by 'mistakes', and another 6% were harmed by "drugs properly prescribed or procedures properly carried out". But as they correctly point out, other studies have shown that drug harm is seriously under-reported - that only between !% and 10% of drug side effects are ever recorded.

So what is the real figure? 12%? Or more? WDDTY continues, confirming the seriousness of these 'side effects' ...

          "Of the patients harmed because of an error, 12% died or suffered severe complications."

Reviewing the figures, from the NHR Greater Manchester Centre, researchers from the London school of Economics, concluded that patient harm "is prevalent across health systems".
  • These are the health systems we all pay for, and which most patients rely upon when they are ill.
So what is the cost to the NHS of this harm? Our doctors know this too. Another BMJ article, also published in July 2019, "Costs of preventable harm could pay for thousands of nurses" focuses on how the £millions that would be saved might be spent on more nurses - presumably so that these additional nurses could provide patients with more of the same harmful drugs and treatments.

More importantly, perhaps, the number of patients who would be saved from harm might be a considerable benefit too.

So huge numbers of patients are harmed by 'medicine'. And huge amounts of NHS money then has to be spent on trying to redress that harm (except, presumably, for those who have been killed).

So no wonder the NHS is in constant financial trouble! 
It has to run ever harder in order to keep up with the harm it is causing to our health!

Wednesday, 6 November 2019

Are Older People responsible for Conventional Medicine's continual health crisis? Or is Conventional Medicine responsible for the sickness of Older People?

"The Elderly suffering from medicines overload"
 This is the headline of an article published by the GP e-magazine, Pulse, on 5th November 2019.The article itself reports a House of Lords committee, which found that elderly patients are being put at risk of being 'poisoned' by their medicines because not enough research has been done on the best doses to give older patients, not enough is known about harmful drug interactions.

This is not new news. It has been happening for decades. It was happening when I managed a group of residential homes for older people in Northamptonsire - in the late 1970's. I wrote about it in last year, in a blog "It's us older people who are ruining the NHS! We should all be ashamed of ourselves for being so sick!

               "The NHS is in crisis. It always needs more resources.And when asked why it cannot manage, why every part of the NHS is failing to cope with patient demand, we are told that it is because of an ageing population. So, all you old people, it is YOU who are to blame! Or are we?
Or are we indeed? My conclusion in that 2018 article was simple and straightforward.
                "Older age has much to recommend it - as long as you stay away from conventional medicine!"
The House of Lords is not pulling punches. It might still call pharmaceutical drugs 'medicine' (which implies that they make us better) but the actually describe them as 'poisons' which is more accurate.

Aging Care has come to a similar conclusion in their article, 'Medical Over-treatment can have dire consequences for seniors'.

The Institute for Healthcare Improvement comes to a similar conclusion in "The hidden drug problem of older adults; medication overload".

And any web search will bring up a host of articles, some going back decades, identifying health issues with older people that are related to pharmaceutical drugs.

So what will conventional medicine do about this new House of Lords committee report? They will do nothing! Pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that harm are all conventional medicine has to offer, so what else can they do, other than ignore it. Shelving reports like this is what conventional medicine has been doing for years.

But fear not! There will be other reports, in the years to come, that will point out the same thing - drugs harm older people, and make them sick. The problem is that these will be ignored too, until such time as we ALL begin to realise that 
  • pharmaceutical drugs are not 'medicines' - they are poisons
  • it's not about 'over-treatment' - its about treatment
  • and the problem is no 'hidden' - it is out here in the open


          "When men differ, both sides ought equally be heard by the public, for when truth and error have fair play, the former is always an over match for the latter"
                                                                                                                                   Benjamin Franklin

The NHS tells us that all vaccines are safe. Doctors insist we should all be vaccinated, some that vaccination should be made mandatory. The government, and the mainstream media support this position, they all dismiss any ‘anti-vaccine’ information as ‘fake news’, and seek to censor debate on the issue.

Yet despite this many people, at least 10%, refuse to be vaccinated, or allow their children to be vaccinated. Why? So where do they get their information? And is this information really fake news, or news that the powerful pharmaceutical industry does not like?

Everyone should be able to accept, or refuse vaccines on the basis of all the evidence. Informed choice is not more important than in making decisions about our health. We are regularly told about the safety of vaccines. So where is the evidence that vaccines are, or can be harmful? The following links are some of the best sources.

Nobody should ever accept a vaccine without first reading the patient information leaflet that comes with each one. Most patients are not shown these. The documents include the known and accepted side effects of vaccines. Pharmaceutical companies are obliged to supply this information; but it is worth noting that they do not have to include every known vaccine side effect, just those that have been proven beyond further doubt or question.

Although conventional medicine says that vaccines are safe, many national governments have set up organisations whose task it is to recompense people who have been injured by these ‘safe’ vaccines.

Vaccine Damage Payment. (
The UK Government has paid out about £73 million to nearly 1000 children and adults, representing 1 in 8 claimants who were a minimum of 60% injured by a vaccine between 1979-2014. These government sponsored schemes have accepted that vaccines can cause a multitude of devastating injuries, including brain damage, seizures, deafness, Guillain-BarrĂ© Syndrome (GBS), encephalitis (inflammation of the brain), and even death.

There are several books available that deal with the question of vaccine harm, and alternatives to them.

Vaccinations: A Thoughtful Parents Guide:How to Make Safe, Sensible Decisions About the Risks, Benefits and Alternatives

The author, midwife, herbalist, and mother of four, Aviva Jill Romm, examines current research on vaccine safety and efficacy, and offers a sensible, balanced discussion of the pros and cons of each routine childhood vaccination. The book presents the full spectrum of options available to parents: full vaccination on a standardised or individualised schedule, selective vaccination, or no vaccinations at all. The book also suggests ways to strengthen children's immune systems and maintain optimal health and offers herbal and homeopathic remedies for childhood ailments.

Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents & Researchers

This book confirms that there is a large body of scientific evidence confirming numerous vaccine safety deficits that counteract well-publicised benefits. Several studies in this book show that mercury and aluminium in vaccines can cause neurological, immunological and developmental harm. Other studies show that childhood vaccines are associated with an increased risk of cancer, allergies, seizures, bleeding disorders, and type 1 diabetes. The peer-reviewed scientific studies in this book also show that a history of measles and mumps is protective against fatal heart attacks and strokes, that the pertussis vaccine caused virulent vaccine-resistant strains of pertussis to emerge, that chickenpox vaccines reduced cases of chickenpox but increased cases of shingles, that children have an increased risk of requiring emergency care after receiving MMR, and much more.

Vaccine Side Effects. (
This is a freely downloadable E-Book. It seeks to balance the risks of vaccine side effects against the risks of common childhood illnesses, and help you feel confident about making the right decision for the health of your child. It provides some simple facts that will stop you being pushed into a decision before you are ready to decide for yourself. The book explains why much of the advice provided by independent health officials on the benefits of vaccines is false, outdated and makes no scientific sense. And it provides clear, simple and logical facts to help you discuss one of the most important decisions for the long term health of your child

Vaccine damage is not a statistical problem. Each case of vaccine harm represents a personal and family tragedy. The following websites include the testimony of many people who have suffered vaccine damage.

Vaccine Injury UK (
This website outlines lots of compelling personal stories about how they, or their children, have suffered from vaccine damage.

Vaccine Injury Info (
Formerly a German website, written by a homeopath, the core of which are literally hundreds of reports of vaccine damage by individual sufferers, or their parents.

There are several websites that have been set up by concerned people, many of whom have suffered from vaccine injury, their sole objective to provide information, and help other people reach their decision about vaccination.

Arnica (
The Arnica Network was formed in 2007 by parents concerned about the vaccination program and interested in the role of natural health, and natural immunity in disease. Within 5 few years, 75 Arnica groups were started nationwide, reflecting the strong interest in natural immunity and the need for like-minded friendship groups and support systems when making such choices for our families.

Jabs (Justice, Awareness & Basic Support). (
JABS, as a self-help group, neither recommends nor advises against vaccinations but we aim to promote understanding about immunisations and offer basic support to any parent whose child has a health problem after vaccination. We want comprehensive information for all parents to make an informed decision on the benefits and risks of vaccination. JABS supports free choice and full information on the real risks of vaccination and childhood diseases.

European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance (
This is an alliance of member organisations, and individual members, from 25 European countries. It consists of consumer groups and pro-choice groups whose members in turn include medical professionals and scientists. Their combined memberships exceed 100,000. They call on all Europeans to stand together in a demand for a united vaccination policy based on freedom of choice and informed consent. They believe that mandatory vaccination is not only a serious risk but a violation of human rights and dignity. They demand transparency and caution as well as recognition and concern for the many vaccine-injured in Europe and beyond.

There are many medical research papers that have shown that vaccines are unsafe. These are rarely publicised, largely ignored by conventional medicine and the mainstream media, but access to them can be gained through these websites.

Med Science Research (
An online library of medical papers relating to vaccination. It states that there are thousands of scientific studies in the medical literature on the dangers of vaccines, and provides access to them.

Vaccination Information Portal (
This website offers what they describe as “reliable, balanced information for parents”. It includes 223 scientific studies looking into the harm caused by vaccines, and evidence about how vaccines have caused autoimmune disease.

STRIVE. Student & Teacher Initiative for Vaccine Education. (
This is a research group run by and for students and teachers. It was founded to provide and promote evidence-based information about vaccinations. They report on a constantly updated resource of scientific opinion, studies, reports and documentaries, that will empower students to make responsible and educated decisions about their healthcare.

These are general websites that seek to discover the truth about vaccine damage, and who seek to expose the misinformation and cover-up that conventional medical establishment engages in .

Vaccine Awareness (
V.A.N provides fully sourced information about vaccinations to enable parents to make a fully informed choice about their child’s vaccinations. Their aim is to support the right of every parent to give informed consent, or informed refusal, by providing all the information available. It is intended both for parents who do not want to vaccinate, and parents of vaccine damaged children,

Learn the Risk (
Learn The Risk is a non-profit organisation in the USA whose objective is to educate people worldwide on the dangers of pharmaceutical products, including vaccines and unnecessary medical treatments, “that are literally killing us”.

Child Health Safety (
This is a British website that aims to provide reliable information on child health safety for parents who want to know about whether they should vaccinate and other health related information. It provides links to important information to assist parents cut through the often misleading, exaggerated and incorrect information given by governments and health officials.  Child Health Safety seeks to publish detailed information often not available elsewhere on issues of vaccination and child health safety.

Child Health Defense (
The website of Robert F. Kennedy (Jr), whose stated aim is to provide reliable information on child health safety for parents who want to know about whether they should vaccinate, and other health related information. It provides links to information which may assist parents cut through the often misleading, exaggerated and incorrect information given by governments and health officials. Its mission statement is to end the epidemic of children’s chronic health conditions by working aggressively to eliminate harmful exposures, hold those responsible accountable, and establish safeguards so this never happens again.

Danger of Vaccines (
This website is written by two parents whose children were damaged by vaccines. Their stated mission is to inform the public about the many dangers of vaccines, presenting information and evidence that shows vaccines are dangerous and sometime even deadly.

Informed Consent Action Network (
Their mission statement states that “you are the authority over your health choices and those of your children. In a medical world manipulated by advertising and financial interests, true information is hard to find, and often harder to understand”. Their stated goal is to put the power of scientifically researched health information into our hands and to be bold and transparent in doing so, thereby enabling your medical decisions to come from tangible understanding, not medical coercion. They campaign for parents’ rights, to protect children, and to support science-based inquiry.

Whale (
This website offers access to a huge amount of material that covers every imaginable vaccine, including vaccines that have been withdrawn over the years, usually after they were found to be unsafe.

Vaxxed TV Channel (
When you get tired of reading all this information, this website provides access to a multitude of videos about vaccines, and the damage they are known to cause.

Put Children First (
This is a book on history of vaccines. Put Children First was founded by parents to let the world know that the Centers For Disease Control (CDC), a division of the Department of Health and Human Services in the USA, is covering-up the relationship between a near-tripling of vaccinations for our children in the 1990s, and the epidemic of autism and other neuro-developmental disorders that began at exactly the same time.

HPV vaccines are now given to young girls to prevent cervical cancer. It probably has one of the worst safety records of all vaccines, and in its relatively short history, has a record of destroying the lives of fit and healthy young children.

Time for Action. (
 Time for Action is a campaign group run by UK families for UK families, whose daughters have all experienced serious, life changing health problems following HPV vaccination.

Come Look. (
This Irish website carries information relevant to the government's attempt to administer the Gardasil vaccine to 12 year old schoolgirls. They state it is not their intention to challenge the manufacturer's claims of actual vaccine efficacy, instead focusing on discussing the safety assurances of the vaccine who advocate its use in mass vaccination.

S.A.N.E VAX (HPV). (
This website describes itself as the ‘First International HPV Vaccine Information Clearing House”. Their mission is to promote only Safe, Affordable, Necessary & Effective vaccines and vaccination practices through education and information. They say they believe in science-based medicine, and that their primary goal is to provide the information necessary to make informed decisions regarding health and well-being.

Although most doctors conform to the official line, there are some doctors, and doctor’s organisations, who speak out.

Physicians for Informed Consent. (
Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) delivers data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and unites doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccination.

Dr Jayne Donegan. (
GP & Homoeopath, with a special interest in vaccination. Dr Donegan is currently the only doctor in the UK whose opinion on vaccination has been tested in extensive UK legal proceedings (GMC 2007) and found to be valid, based on sound research and peer reviewed medical literature ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.

Vaccination Decision. (
The website of Dr Brian Boyd, the stated purpose of which is to provide information that can help make decisions about vaccines. Additional information is provided to help parents give their child the best opportunity to develop a healthy immune system, which should be the primary objective in this healthcare decision.

Conventional medicine, when not denying that vaccine can cause serious damage to health, claim that such damage is ‘rare’.

Obviously the rarity of this damage is off little assistance to those who become one of the ‘rare exceptions’ to the claimed safety of vaccines.

Yet how rare is vaccine damage? Conventional medicine assesses rarity through the number of reported cases of vaccine damage set against the number of people who are vaccinated. Yet studies show that only between 1% and 10% of drug side effects are ever reported, or recorded. This means that vaccine damage is between 10 times, and 100 times less rare than is admitted.

Reporting vaccine damage might even be lower than this, as doctors have been so busy trying to convince us that vaccines are safe, they can often be found denying that ill-health following vaccination has anything to do with the vaccine.

The decision to vaccinate, or not to vaccinate, should be based on the best information available to us. Conventional medicine will continue to claim that vaccines are safe, indeed essential to our health. The information contained within all the links referred to in this article suggests that this is not so.

Indeed, evidence that vaccines can cause harm can be found within conventional medical literature, for instance, in the Patient Information Leaflets, mentioned above.

Everyone should be able to accept, or refuse vaccines on the basis of ALL the evidence. Informed choice is never more important than in making decisions about our health. So it is not possible to make an informed decision on vaccines unless the evidence of vaccine harm is also fully considered, alongside the claims made by conventional medicine that they are safe.

Tuesday, 29 October 2019

DOCTORS MEDICAL INSURANCE. What happens when doctors harm patients? (4)

Conventional medicine, we are told, is very safe and effective. Yet it is easy to prove otherwise. Reading the side effects of drugs and vaccines outlined on the Patient Information Leaflets (PILs). Looking at compensation schemes for patients who have been damaged by drugs and vaccines. And medical insurance schemes for doctors is another.

During the last 2-3 years ago I have written about doctors medical insurance schemes, and the problems they face. Medical insurance protect doctors from the consequences of prescribing harmful and dangerous drugs and vaccines to patients.

In May 2016, in "What happens when doctors harm patients?" I began to outline the problem. Doctors were struggling to cope with ever increasing premium payments.

               "Multimillion-pound compensation claims against GPs and private consultants have risen three-fold over the past decade.... The Medical Defence Union (MDU) said that it has settled 12 compensation claims in excess of £1m in 2015.

In July 2016, in "What happens when doctors harm patients? (2)" I described how the British government had agreed to reimburse any price rises in GP's indemnity insurance for the coming years.

Yet even this did not relieve the problem. In August 2017, "Indemnity. What happens when doctors harm patients (3) I outlined how the situation was getting worse. The chair of the BMA GP Committee stated that the increases in litigation costs for defense organisations had ‘significantly increased’. So, the government decided that doctors should not have to pay insurance premiums, they would be taken on by the NHS. So what these 3 articles described was this  
  • OUR government 
  • is using OUR money
  • to support conventional doctors
  • prescribing pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines
  • that harm and kill US
  • in ever-increasing numbers
  • at an ever-increasing cost!
I described it as "a conspiracy against both patients and taxpayers". In other words, we were actually paying for doctors to harm us!

Now, in an article in the GP magazine, "MDU raises concern over historic claims funds as legal battle with government continues". there is a clear indication that the situation remains unresolved, that the MDU continues to have a claim over government over 'historical clinical negligence claims', and that these claims means that it faces 'increased demand' for payouts - set against dwindling funds contributed by doctors (and taxpayers).

And this ongoing medical insurance situation is the result of operating a medical system we are regularly being told is both safe and effective!

Why is this important? Two other blogs outline the extent of the problem. In February 2018, in."Patient harm? Medical blunders are bankrupting the NHS! Or is it just dangerous medicine? I sought to place the blame for this desperate situation where blame should rest - with a medical system that is inherently dangerous, that does not harm patients through medical negligence but through drugs and vaccines that are known to be unsafe.

And the cost of conventional medicine is not measured just in insurance premiums. In March 2018, in "22,000 people die every year in England as a result of medical errors. How many more die from pharmaceutical drugs that are NOT given in error?" I provided details of just why medical insurance for doctors was proving to be such a huge cost factor in delivering conventional medical services within the NHS.

And all this happening within a conventional medical system that insists that its treatments are both safe and effective!

Loose Women? Loose editorial control? Or is ITV playing fast and very loose with honesty?

  • Everyone in the homeopathic, and indeed the whole natural medical community, understands that the mainstream media supports the conventional medical establishment to the point of complicity.
  • We no longer, expect to see fair or even honest reporting on medical issues in the press, or on the broadcast media. It has not happened for 15-20 years!
One of my doughty colleagues, Grace da Silva, recently watched the ITV programme, Loose Women, and noticed that they were running a poll. The question posed was whether parents who did not vaccinate their children should be fined - a topical issue considering that our government is considering the introduction of mandatory vaccination. So she decided to vote, and whilst doing so, she noted the voting figures.

The result was duly announced. There was a huge majority for the imposition of fines - a massive 70% in favour of fining parents, and only 30% against. Grace was aghast, and she tells me that she took 3 minutes to complain to the programme.

On 24th October 2019 'Loose Women' gave an apology, and gave out the correct poll result - 70% against fining patients, and 30% in favour of fines. They had made a 'mistake'! We were told that it has human error! There was, however, no explanation of why such an human error could ever have been made. Apparently several people complained to Ofcom so ITV had no option but to tell the truth. Yet serious questions arise.
  • Was it really a mistake?
  • Is it possible that ITV did not just got the result wrong, but actually reversed it?
  • Was there no editorial oversight?
  • Would a correction have been made if there had no complaints?
As another colleague told me, an former TV producer, it would be highly unlikely that this was "human error", that everything, and especially programme content, is checked, double checked. She said that if she had allowed that kind of "mistake" on her job she would have been fired! She said that this was not just editorial control; there would be many other crew members whose job it would have been check everything.

The mainstream media regularly and gratuitously attacks homeopathy, natural medicine generally. It also provides the conventional medical establishment with an uncritical outlet for its propaganda. Yet does this 'mistake' mean that they are prepared to go further?
  • To raise support for the policy of the conventional medical establishment?
  • To provide the pharmaceutical industry with a captive and obligatory market for their drugs?
Just how important are pharmaceutical advertising revenues to ITV, and the mainstream media generally?

Monday, 28 October 2019

Is Homeopathy Dangerous? Or is Conventional Medicine trying to hide from its own failure?

Today (28th October 2019) has witnessed yet another full-frontal attack on Homeopath by the conventional medical establishment in the mainstream media. Well, the homeopathic community is used to it. It is a regular occurrence now!

NHS Chief's Blast at 'Dangerous' Homeopathy was the headline in the Daily Mail. On the same day the Daily Telegraph's headline was "NHS Leaders Declare War on Homeopathy', and the Scottish Daily Mail leads with "NHS Chief slams homeopathic remedies". I haven't bothered to read the latter two articles. So how do I know about them? They were referred to in the Daily Mail article, all published on the same day!. So how did they know what other papers were writing about - on the same day?

Might it be that this was a planned, coordinated anti-homeopathy campaign? Again, there are no surprises if this was indeed the case. The mainstream media is funded by pharmaceutical companies to the extent that these papers would not survive if their advertising was withdrawn. So for their own viability they have to stand alongside the conventional medical establishment. And they do - meekly, slavishly, dishonorably.

This epidsode means that there can no longer be any doubt that the UK's NHS (National Health Service) is now totally controlled by the pharmaceutical industry, not just because the treatments it offers to its patients are now almost totally drug-based, but because it routinely and gratuitously attacks any form of alternative medicine, not least homeopathy.

So are these attacks on homeopathy by the mainstream media, and the NHS, based on the fact that conventional medicine is winning the war of sickness and disease?

This is a difficult claim for anyone to argue, not least the NHS!
  • The NHS has always failed to cope with the ever rising levels of illness and disease that we have witnessed over the past 70+ years.
  • The NHS has never been able to manage patient demand for health care even though its has had an ever-expanding budget.
  • And the more pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines the NHS has provided for us, to make us healthier, the sicker we have become.
  • Disease is out of control. Allergy, Alzheimers, Arthritis, Asthma, Autism, Cancer, Dementia, Diabetes (and every other chronic disease you might want to add) are all now running at unprecedented levels.
  • And the numbers of patients suffering from each of these diseases are not reducing, they are increasing, very rapidly
  • And many of these chronic diseases are no longer 'old age' ailments, as they were once considered: younger adults and children now suffer from them. In increasing numbers.
If conventional medicine was ever going to work, if pharmaceutical drugs were ever going to be found effective, we would now be a healthier, not a sicker nation. And the conventional medical establishment would be presenting medical statistics to prove this. Instead we face these epidemics of chronic disease, and a medical system that cannot recruit sufficient doctors to deal with increasing health demands.

So what's the problem? How does the NHS explain these 70+ years of medical failure?
  • It's all the fault of homeopathy!
Why do 10% of parents refuse to allow their children to be vaccinated (and probably another 10% are reluctant, but do so because of the constant pressure)?
  • Its all the fault of homeopathy! And those dreadful anti-vaxxers, of course!
Only a tiny proportion of the NHS budget has ever been spent on homeopathy (or any other alternative medical treatment). 

Only a tiny proportion of patients use homeopathy for their medical treatment, mostly it is un-subsidised, they have to pay for it themselves, and broadly they are happy to do so.

So is something else going on here? Is the conventional medical establishment beginning to realise that it is failing to deliver good health?
  • their drugs are unsafe, and increasingly cannot be used because of their dangerous side effects.
  • their drugs are ineffective, they are not capable of dealing with chronic disease epidemics.
  • we invest exclusively on a medical system that is exorbitantly expensive
  • even when the NHS budget is regularly increased by £billions, and bankrupting the nation, it still cannot cope.
So what to do? Focus on these problems? Investigate its own failure?

Or attack other medical systems?
Rage that some patients won't vaccinate for diseases that are no longer a major problem (and were not major problems when their vaccines were first introduced)?

No! Attack the competition! Insist that pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are safe and effective! State that any other medical therapy is unproven, worthless, even dangerous!

A wounded, and cornered animal is a very dangerous animal. It will strike out, randomly, blindly, to defend itself from further harm. And this is what we can see happening.

But questions are being asked, even if they are not currently being asked within the NHS, within government, or within the media. The 10% who are refusing vaccines are the one's who are asking questions, with no help from doctors, politicians, or journalists.
  • Is what is being offered by the NHS (drugs/vaccines) really safe? 
  • Are they effective? Are their reducing or increasing disease? 
  • And is the NHS being bankrupted by a medical system that needs ever more money, more resources, with each successive year.
Another 10% of the population will soon be asking questions too.
  • Is homeopathy really to blame for medical failure? 
  • Why is the NHS obsessing with measles and mumps?
  • Why is it so unconcerned about ever-rising levels of autism, dementia, cancer, et al?
When this new 10% joins the present 10% it will be the beginning of everyone becoming aware. The NHS has nothing safe or healthy to offer us. It's drug cabinet is almost bare. We are getting sicker.

But homeopathy is dangerous - isn't it!

Wednesday, 23 October 2019

DOCTORS IN DISTRESS. The suicide rate is the highest of any profession. Why is this?

One doctor commits suicide every day in the USA, according to the WebMD website, the highest suicide rate of any profession, and more than double the general population. These were the findings presented at the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in 2018 . Yet this problem is not confined to America, studies from Finland, Norway, Australia, Singapore and China have shown an increase in anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts among medical students and health care professionals.

In England the situation is no different. In September 2018, Pulse (the GP's e-newsletter) outlined data that showed over 400 doctors had committed suicide in 4 years.

So why is being a doctor such a stressful occupation? Doctors are generously paid. They are respected members of local communities. They are portrayed positively in an endless stream of television series. And their social role is an aspiration for many young people. It is widely known that doctors work long hours, and they work daily with patients who are very sick. Yet even so, why do so many doctors feel it necessary to end their lives?

The main reason may reside within the performance of the conventional medical system, and our expectations of it.
  • It is widely believed that conventional medicine, and pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, are winning the war against illness and disease.
  • When we are ill our first thought is usually to visit our doctor, who we confidently expect will be able to make us well again.
It is this that motivates people to enter the medical profession, and they do so full of hope and expectation of doing good, and helping people. Unfortunately, the reality is all too different.
  • So patients are just not getting better. They get sick and they are prescribed a drug. The drug, if effective at all, has only short-term effects; so the patient needs more, repeat prescriptions. And the longer they take the drug, the more likely they are to suffer side effects. And these side-effect-illnesses then have to be treated - with more drugs.
  • Doctors don't see their patients getting better. They actually get worse, month by month, often before their very eyes. The number of patients waiting outside the surgery door does not reduce, it grows, with older patients returning regularly because they are still ill, and new patients arriving all the time.
  • Yet patients are not part of this loop. They continue to believe the conventional medicine is the route to good health, that doctors have the answer to all their medical problems. After all, this is what patients are told, in the mainstream media, by leading health professionals, by pharmaceutical industry propaganda. They face expectations they are unable to meet.
  • So patients demand the impossible of them. They demand that doctors prescribe - something, anything. Yet they have nothing safe or effective to prescribe. My recent blog about the Opioid scandal is a case in point. Doctors have been told to restrict opioid prescriptions: but they are actually prescribing more. Why? The study on which this finding was based said that doctors are limited in the choices they have for dealing with chronic pain.
* So whilst teachers teach - and reap the rewards of seeing their pupils learn.....

* Whilst the police undertake their duties, investigate crime - and keep the public safe.....

* Whilst carers care for their clients - and are rewarded by their gratitude.....

.... doctors treat their patients and they never get well; they get sicker, they are not able to meet their patients demands for drugs, they become grossly overworked by increasingly un-deliverable demands being made on their time.

It is the most depressing situation I can imagine.

On top of this, more recently, there have been problems in recruitment. For many years fewer people are wanting to become doctors. So whilst there is more demand for doctors most colleges are failing to recruit sufficient students to fill the number of places they offer.

So as doctors retire, many taking early retirement, or leave the profession, or indeed, commit suicide, those who are left are put under an even greater strain, and this seriously affects the mental health of many of the remaining doctors. So my conclusion, my answer to why so many doctors are taking their own lives, is almost inevitable.....

Doctors are in serious distress because they are in the front-line of a profession, a medical system, that is failing badly