Search This Blog

Wednesday 18 December 2019

Pharmaceutical Medicine. It's death throes within the NHS. Perhaps Patient Choice and Homeopathy can help?

Pharmaceutical medicine within the British NHS is in it's death throes. Only patient choice, and the reintroduction of homeopathy, and other natural therapies, is likely to save it.
  • Sick patients cannot get timely access to treatment anywhere in the system
  • Hospital beds are full, with some sick patients laying on trolleys in corridors
  • Accident & Emergency (A&E) waiting times are getting ever longer
  • In most areas it is getting more difficult to get a doctors appointment
  • Doctors are in short supply, many retiring early, and/or reducing their working hours because of the stress involved in the jobs
  • Nurses are getting scarcer too, overworked and underpaid (nurses in Northern Ireland are on strike today)
  • The routine annual winter NHS crisis is already worse this year than it was last year
  • There appears to be a flu epidemic of massive proportions on the near horizon, with admissions to hospital rising by more than 40% just this week alone
  • The newly elected Conservative government is making promises about huge increases in funding for the  NHS, and the recruitment of thousands more doctors and nurses (without apparently too much idea about from where they might emerge)
Anyone who has not read this blog before might be scratching their head and asking why this should be, or otherwise accepting the usual excuses - about us getting older, and the chronic under-funding over the last 10 years.
  • This is all nonsense. This is the failure of an entire medical system - pharmaceutical medicine, based as it is on drugs and vaccines - which through their (largely denied) 'side effects' and 'adverse reactions' are making us increasingly sick.
  • So to spend more money on more drugs and vaccines; and more doctors to dispense them; and more nurses to cope with patients who suffer not only from an illness, but from the side effects of drug treatment, do not get well but are being made sicker. This is NOT a solution.
So can I offer a solution? Offer every waiting, suffering patient - 'patient choice' - a choice of medical therapies.

Go the the people who are queuing at the GP surgeries, at hospitals, at A&E, and make them an offer - an appointment with a local homeopath, or osteopath, or naturopath, or herbalist, et al.

The NHS (dominated and controlled as it is by pharmaceutical interests) will most certainly complain that these natural therapies do not work (and other nonsense). And some patients will not want to take up the offer - which in terms of patient choice and health freedom is fine.

But many patients will welcome the opportunity to remove themselves from the queues, and to receive treatment.

The therapists are out here. Many will be able, happy, even glad to take on additional patients. For the NHS it will not only shorten the queues, it will take the pressure off doctors, nurses, and other staff. For the therapist it will be an opportunity to demonstrate how successful they can be in tackling serious illness and disease. For patients it will open their minds to new medical therapies that can be used for sickness that is not, or cannot be successfully treated with pharmaceutical medicine.

This would be a win-win situation for everyone
(with the possible exception of the pharmaceutical industry)

Tuesday 17 December 2019

VACCINES & VACCINATION. Political bribery and industrial corruption.

  • Most politician in the USA support mass vaccination programmes.
  • Many politicians in the USA support mandatory vaccination.
  • All politicians in the USA seem incapable of understanding, and unwilling to see, that vaccines cause patient harm.
The HPV-Vaccine Side Effects website has asked the question
  • Why do almost all politicians support mass vaccination?
and came up with a simple but telling answer from some publicly available statistics to back up that answer. The generated a list of donations accepted by leading USA politicians from the health sector. They require little clarification.

Bernie Sanders. Democrat. $2,052,050

Joe Biden. Democrat. $1,330,186

Donald Trump. Republican. $1,797,878

Mike Pence. Republican. $1,003,645

Elizabeth Warren. Democrat. $1,369,497

Nancy Pelosi. Democrat. £454,745

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Democrat. £34,965

Ted Cruz. Republican. $34,965

Pete Buttigieg. Democrat. $1,870,719

Lindsey Graham. Republican. $514,197

Cory Booker. Democrat. $525,164

Marco Rubio. Republican. $920,884

Mitt Romney. Republican. £148,350

Mitch McConnell. Republican. $2,748,789

They looked only at the most popular current politicians on the website. Their conclusion was simple.

               "You will notice for sure that it doesn’t matter much to which party the politicians belong. Republicans or Democrats, they all get money directly from the health industry and of course this will influence their decisions."
My conclusion.
  • The payments are not made for nothing, without accepting something in return. 
  • The payments are corrupt, corrupting of both payer and beneficiary. 
  • They are made by an industrial sector that has an agenda - the problems associated with a failing industry that is harming and killing millions of people.
Is it the same in Europe. Perhaps not to the same obvious extent, there are rules that prevent these kinds of excessive political donation to politicians, and to political parties. But with an industry with unlimited resources to spend on bribery there are no doubt lots of ways they can generate the same result.


DEATH BY PHARMACEUTICAL DRUGS. Equivalant to one Jumbo Jet crashing every day. And that's just in the USA! The failure of Regulation. The failure of politicians and governments to protect the people.

Jon Rappoport's blog has regularly referred to the medical drugs that are killing Americans at the rate of 106,000 per year, or as he says, a million deaths every decade. He takes this figure from an estimate published on 26th July 2000 by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), entitled "Is US health really the best in the world?", written by Barara Starfield at the John Hopkins School of Public Health.

Yet even Starfield's calculation must now be considered to be an under-estimate, given the prodigious number of pharmaceutical drugs being prescribed now as compared to 20 years ago. As Rappoport said in his blog

               "Countries of the world are literally being assaulted by pharmaceutical companies and their foot-soldier doctors. It's chemical warfare".

Yet even with 106,000 people dying from pharmaceutical medicine, 1,000,000 every decade, remains just a statistic, and number. So what exactly does this number represent?

It represents a Jumbo Jet crashing every day, killing nearly 300 people,
plus the distress and grief caused to their families and friends.

So, if a Jumbo Jet did crash every day what action might we expect to be taken by the aviation authorities? They would surely ground all the planes, remove them from the sky, and insist that they do not fly again until they were proven to be safe.

And, of course, this is exactly what has happened following 'a mere' 2 jumbo jets crashing earlier this year, one in Indonesia, the other in Ethiopia, killing many more than 300 people. The planes, Boeing 737 Max airliners, were grounded, removed from the sky, and told they would not fly again until they were proven to be safe.

Yesterday, the USA's Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) announced that the planes would not be allowed to fly again, even after nine months after the two planes had crashed. The FAA has taken decisive action, even though it has been (quite rightly) criticised for allowing a flawed aircraft to fly in the first place!

This is, after all, what people expect from regulators, whether it is planes, drugs, or anything else  - that they take decisive action to protect the public from harm, both before it happens, and after tragedies of this kind.

So what is the US drug regulator, the FDA, doing about the public dying at an equivalent rate on one Jumbo Jet crashing every day?


In fairness, the FDA is not alone in its incompetence and lack of concern. Just as aviation regulators in other countries failed to take action against the Boeing 737 Max airliner, other pharmaceutical drug regulators around the world (the EDA in Europe, the MHRC in Britain, et al) are failing with an equal lack of concern, and displaying an equal lack of competence.
  • Pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines continue to be approved, and subsequently given to patients, who are harmed and even killed by them.
  • And when this harm is proven, little action is taken, beyond exhorting doctors to be more careful when prescribing them.
And just as the FAA has been accused of being "too close" to Boeing, and its commercial and financial interests, the FDA is regularly accused of being "too close" to the massively powerful pharmaceutical industry. Indeed, all industrial regulators are too close to the companies they are supposed to be regulating. The reason is usually simple, but essentially corrupt.
  • Usually, regulators and the process of regulation is paid for by the companies they are supposed to be regulating.
  • It is in the financial and commercial interest of companies to 'cosy-up' to regulators, to make it worthwhile for the regulator not to regulate too rigorously. And this is what happens.
  • There is also, often. a 'revolving door', with company employees becoming regulators, and vice versa. The regulated becomes the regulator!
  • Even politicians and governments seem unconcerned, perhaps in the realisation that company investments, and the employment they provide, are good for their political interests.
The only people who lose out are the very people regulators are supposed to be protecting!

Tuesday 10 December 2019

Pharmaceutical medicine. What a faff! Drugs make everything so complicated. Homeopathy is so much simpler

Have you ever wondered how complicated conventional, drug-based medicine can be? For instance, we have all heard the usual instructions from our medical doctors in recent months about the importance of the getting the influenza, or flu vaccine.

Yet it's not as simple as that - going along to your doctor, having a variety of noxious materials (like mercury) injected into your bloodstream, and resting assured that all is well.

The first complication comes when you suffer from vaccine side effects. I have written about about these side effects several times over the years, the last time in July 2019. Doctors know about these serious side effects. They are readily available within their own medical literature, not least in the Patient Information Leaflets (PIL) that accompanies each vaccine. Moreover, these side effects can be serious, and as the link above shows, quoting the PIL, ends up with the warning that the vaccines can cause death!

The second complication is that the vaccine does not work. Perhaps the drug company has chosen the wrong strain of the flu virus, or some other excuse. So after every flu season statistics are produced (but not widely publicised) showing that the effectiveness of the vaccine has been severely limited. I last wrote about this in detail in January 2018.

This leads directly to the third complication, as described on 4 December 2019 in MIMS. "Flu antivirals approved for NHS prescribing as cases increase" (my emphasis). So the vaccine isn't working (yet again) this year, but doctors can now prescribe antiviral drugs (Tamiflu) for both the prevention and treatment of influenza. They now have a second line of treatment for you. But the 'complication'  arises when we see that Tamiflu is also known to be both ineffective, and causes very serious side effects. Indeed, the drug, also known as oseltamivir, has already been withdrawn or banned in some countries.

The fourth complication is that it's not just YOU who have to be vaccinated against flu - it's everyone else! Doctors call it "Herd Immunity". So even though you are vaccinated, you are still at risk - because other people aren't. The solution (sic) to this, according to pharmaceutical medicine, is to make vaccination mandatory, to force you to have a vaccination that is both dangerous AND ineffective. Forced vaccination is already becoming a reality in some parts of the world.

So when dealing with influenza, as with most other illnesses, pharmaceutical medicine struggles to provide any treatment that is safe, effective, straightforward and uncomplicated.

With Homeopathy, everything is so much simpler.

First, you can avoid getting the flu by taking a simple remedy regularly, every month or so, throughout the flu season. I have described the simple process in this blog.

Second, if you forget to do this, and should you contract flu, there are a number of homeopathic remedies that will treat (reduce, ease and shorten) the symptoms, and reduce your suffering. I have written about these remedies here, providing simple descriptions about when they should be used. No home should be without these remedies.

That's why I don't have to worry about the flu. It is a dreadful illness. Many years ago, before I became a homeopath, both my wife and I had fully-fledged flu over the Christmas period. Neither of us have ever felt so bad, and for so long. Neither of us want to go through it again. So we now rely entirely and completely on homeopathy. It's just so easy!

It is only yesterday that I wrote this blog, yet I already need to write this postscript. Why? Today, it has been announced that an outbreak of bird flu in Suffolk will lead to a mass slaughter of 27,000 chickens. So is this another 'complication' to add to the four I outlined yesterday?

Pharmaceutical medicine has no answer to influenza, of whatever sort it might be. So when "a number of the birds" were found to have the H5 strain of avian flu on a Suffolk chicken farm, it panicked the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

Panic is a regular response of conventional, drug based medicine. It knows that if there is an outbreak of any illness it has little or nothing to offer. It is the ideal breeding ground for panic! So, in this case, and as these are only (sic) chickens - cull them - cull them all. And set up a 1km (0.6 mile) exclusion zone around the farm to limit the risk of the disease spreading.

I feel sorry for the chickens, who have to die because of a disease that homeopathy could deal with, easily, by adding a homeopathic remedy to their water supply. But of course, Defra would not think of doing so. It's not just that the government department is controlled by conventional vets. The law of the land states that animals cannot be treated with homeopathy. Conventional vets have been given a monopoly in the treatment of animals, and 27,000 chickens are now going to pay the awful price.
What a faff! How senseless! What nonsense!

It is time that we all began to see through the hopelessness and helplessness of pharmaceutical medicine. 
It has little or nothing to offer in the treatment of any disease - not just influenza - and not just for chickens.

Monday 9 December 2019

Health Issues and Politics. The General Election in Britain (2). 2019.

              " I predict, (in advance) that these (and other) false assumptions will underlie the basis of the political debate to come, and that the inevitable result will be that Britain decides to spend still more money on a medical system whose failure is spiraling out of control."

I predicted this back in August - that political parties would seek to outbid each other on how much additional money they could spend on the NHS. And this is what has happened! It was an easy prediction based on one of these false assumptions - "that health is good: therefore spending more money on health is good".
  • At the moment (2019-2020) the UK spends £121 billion on the NHS.
  • The Conservative party has plans to increase this to £149 billion.
  • The Liberal Democrats have pledged to spend £154 billion.
  • And Labour is committed to spend £155 billion.
It remains to be seen who will win the election, but two things have already been made clear
  • there is no longer a political debate about how much more money to spend on the NHS, and conventional medicine: the politics now is about each party seeking to outbid each other in their plans and expenditure promises
  • despite the mainstream media castigating the Labour party for its spending promises - the huge increases being promised are not sufficient to meet the needs of the NHS. The NHS, now totally dominated and controlled by pharmaceutical medicine, has announced that these increases are not enough. The NHS needs even more.
NHS Providers has accused politicians of not offering 'credible answers' to the NHS's biggest challenges, of ducking the big issues in health and social care during the election. Its head, Chris Hopson, writing in the Times, has urged all political parties not to make 'empty promises' or create 'unrealistic expectations.

The parties have also made promises to increase staffing. Labour, for instance, has pledged to boost nurse numbers by 24,000, the Conservatives by 50,000.The Liberal Democrats have promised to put one penny on income tax to help fund health and social care.

But despite this Hopson said the election debate had 'fallen short' - presumably of his hopes and expectations. Politicians have just not listened to him.

What this does is to give notice to all political parties that spending money on an NHS dominated and controlled by pharmaceutical medicine is always going to fall short. The NHS, as currently constituted, is a bottomless pit. It does not matter how much money is thrown into it - it will still demand more.

So why is this? And why has this 'why?' question never been asked - by politicians, or the media?

This is what happens when you continue to increase spending, exponentially
- on a failed medical system.  

Pharmaceutical medicine is not making sick patients better, so the demand for health care never gets less. And drug and vaccine 'side effects' cause epidemic levels of chronic disease which then have to be treated. And they are treated by a medical system that does not work. Then, patients damaged by these drugs and vaccines have to be looked after.

So I am not critical of politicians who believe it is a good idea to spend more on health. But I do blame politicians for failing to ask appropriate questions.

Why is it that, no matter how much money is ploughed into the NHS, it is never enough?

The problem with the NHS is not decades of under-investment, or an ageing population. It is that investment is being made into a medical system, pharmaceutical medicine, that does not work, that has never worked, and will never work.

Wednesday 4 December 2019

Pharmaceutical Medicine. What have they done to the health of our children?

I receive regular emails from the USA organisation 'Children's Health Defense'. The latest, received today (4th December 2019), includes the following frightening statistics. They indicate, dramatically, the health outcomes of  70 to 100 years of pharmaceutical medicine on our young children. It is nothing less than a catastrophy
  • 1 in 2 USA children is chronically ill
  • 1 in 2 USA 13-18 year olds diagnosed with one mental health disorder
  • 1 in 3 USA children suffer from anxiety disorders
  • 1 in 6 USA children has developmental disorder
  • 1 in 8 USA children requires special education services
  • 1 in 11 USA children has ADHD
  • 1 in 12 USA children has asthma
  • 1 in 13 USA children has food allergies including deadly peanut allergies
  • 1 in 36 American children has autism
  • More than 15,000 children will be diagnosed with cancer in 2019 alone
And, as they say, beyond the USA, in Europe and elsewhere, these health conditions in children are equally concerning.

Why is this happening - unprecedented levels of seriously damaged children?


What is the response of the pharmaceutical medical establishment to this health crisis?