Interesting observation - MDs recently writing about restrictive application of therapies, and confusion about prescription drugs. In addition, there was also an article criticizing "Evidenced based medicine." These two will be added to the post as references.

The medical establishment in collusion with Big Pharma continues unashamedly, to discredit attempts by their ethical peers choosing less harmful modalities, or dare to expose fraudulent claims of prescribed
medications, and futile, avoidable surgery/butchery? Surgery is sometimes necessary, overall, far too prescriptive. Likewise, in a matter of life and death, medical intervention can be life saving.

Overall, The Hippocratic Oath matters little....

Informative vid from You Tube:



Excellent article written in the late 1970s, it speaks for itself, read on.

The Devil’s Priests

CONFESSIONS OF A MEDICAL HERETIC
By Robert S. Mendelsohn, M.D.

Published by Contemporary Books
ISBN Number 0-8092-4131-5
Available from Amazon Books and elsewhere.

The Devil’s Priests

CONFESSIONS OF A MEDICAL HERETIC
By Robert S. Mendelsohn, M.D.

Published by Contemporary Books
ISBN Number 0-8092-4131-5
Available from Amazon Books and elsewhere.

Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, known to millions through his nationally syndicated column as “The People’s Doctor”, was the national medical director of Project Head Start and chairman of the Medical Licensure Committee for the state of Illinois, USA. Among the many faculty and hospital posts he held, he was an associate professor at the University of Illinois Medical School and a director of Chicago’s Michael Reese Hospital.

Dr. Mendelsohn, world-famous physician and patient advocate, was a pioneer in the movement toward truth in the medical profession. Here he explains why Modern Medicine’s methods are often more dangerous that the diseases they are designed to diagnose and treat.

Although Dr. Mendelsohn’s book, ‘Confessions of a Medical Heretic’ was published in 1979, what he has written is even truer today. Dr. Mendelsohn writes about the doctors in the USA. The same parallels can be equally applied in many cases to other parts of the world.

One Click publishes an extract from Dr. Mendelsohn’s book entitled ‘The Devil’s Priests’. In relation to what is transpiring with the MMR Vaccine and ME/CFS patients in the UK, publication of this chapter would seem to be extremely pertinent at this time. The next time that any of you encounter a doctor such as Michael Fitzpatrick or a psychiatrist from the ‘Wessely school’, we suggest that you remember this chapter and use it to good effect.

The One Click Group

I always laugh when someone from the American Medical Association or some other doctors’ organization claims that doctors have no special powers over people. After I finish laughing, I always ask how many people can tell you to take off your clothes and you’ll do it.

Because doctors are really the priests of the Church of Modern Medicine, most people don’t deny them their extra influence over our lives. After all, most doctors are honest, dedicated, intelligent, committed, healthy, educated, and capable, aren’t they? The doctor is the rock upon which Modern Medicine’s Church is built, isn’t he?

Not by a long shot. Doctors are only human — in the worst ways. You can’t assume your doctor is any of the nice things listed above, because doctors turn out to be dishonest, corrupt, unethical, sick, poorly educated, and downright stupid more often than the rest of society.

My favorite example of how doctors can be less intelligent than the situation calls for is a matter of public record. As part of the hearings before the Senate Health Subcommittee, Senator Edward Kennedy recalled a skiing injury to his shoulder, suffered when he was a young man. His father called in four specialists to examine the boy and recommend treatment. Three recommended surgery. The advice of the fourth doctor, who did not recommend surgery, was followed, however. He had just as many degrees as the others. The injury healed. Senator Kennedy’s colleagues then proceeded to question Dr. Lawrence Weed, Professor of Medicine at the University of Vermont and originator of a highly popular patient record system for hospitals. Dr. Weed’s reply was that the “senator’s shoulder probably would have healed as satisfactorily if the operation hadn’t been performed.”

When doctors are formally tested, the results are less than encouraging. In a recent test involving the prescribing of antibiotics half of the doctors who voluntarily took the test scored sixty-eight percent or lower. We’ve already seen in the previous chapters how dangerous it is to have a doctor work on you. All of that danger doesn’t necessarily derive from the inherent risks of the treatment itself. Doctors simply botch some of those procedures. When I meet a doctor, I generally figure I’m meeting a person who is narrow minded, prejudiced, and fairly incapable of reasoning and deliberation. Few of the doctors I meet prove my prediction wrong.

Doctors can’t be counted on to be entirely ethical, either. The dean of Harvard Medical School, Dr. Robert H. Ebert, and the dean of the Yale Medical School, Dr. Lewis Thomas, acted as paid consultants to the Squibb Corporation at the same time they were trying to persuade the Food and Drug Administration to lift the ban on Mysteclin, one of Squibb’s biggest moneymakers. Dr. Ebert that he “gave the best advice I could. These were honest opinions.” But he also declined to specify the amount of the “modest retainer” Squibb Vice-President Norman R. Ritter admitted paying him and Dr. Thomas. Dr. Ebert later became a paid director of the drug company and admitted to owning stock valued at $15,000.

In 1972, Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, then of Case-Western Reserve University, one of the world’s authorities on chemical causes of cancer and birth defects, told the Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs that “the National Academy of Sciences is riddled with conflict of interest.” He reported that panels that decide on crucial issues such as safety of food additives frequently are dominated by friends or direct associates of the interests that are supposed to be regulated. “In this country you can buy the data you require to support your case,” he said.

Fraud in scientific research is commonplace enough to keep it off the front pages. The Food and Drug Administration has uncovered such niceties as overdosing and underdosing of patients, fabrication of records, and drug dumping when they investigate experimental drug trials. Of course, in these instances, doctors working for drug companies have as their goal producing results that will convince the FDA to approve the drug. Sometimes, with competition for grant money getting more and more fierce, doctors simply want to produce results that will keep the funding lines open. Since all the “good ol’ boy” researchers are in the same boat, there seems to be a great tolerance for sloppy experiments, unconfirmable results, and carelessness in interpreting results.

Dr. Ernest Borek, a University of Colorado microbiologist, said that “increasing amounts of faked data or, less flagrantly, data with body English put on them, make their way into scientific journals.” Nobel Prize winner Salvadore E. Luria, a biologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said “I know of at least two cases in which highly respected scientists had to retract findings reported from their laboratories, because they discovered that these findings had been manufactured by one of their collaborators.”

Another now classic example of fraud occurred in the Sloane-Kettering Institute where investigator Dr. William Summerlin admitted painting mice to make them look as though successful skin grafts had been done. A predecessor to Dr. Summerlin in the field of painting animals was Paul Kammerer, the Austrian geneticist, who early in the twentieth century painted the foot of a toad in order to prove the Lamarckian theory of transmission of acquired traits. When he was later exposed in Arthur Koessler’s book, The Case of the Midwife Toad, Kammerer shot himself.

Dr. Richard W. Roberts, director of the National Bureau of Standards, said that “half or more of the numerical data published by scientists in their journal articles is unusable because there is no evidence that the researcher accurately measured what he thought he was measuring or no evidence that possible sources of error eliminated or accounted for.” Since it is almost impossible for the average reader of scientific journals to determine which half of the article is usable and which is not, you have to wonder whether the medical journals serve as avenues of communication or confusion.

One method of judging the validity of a scientific article is to examine the footnote for the source of funding. Drug companies’ records regarding integrity of research are not sparkling enough to warrant much trust. Doctors have been shown not to be above fudging and even fabricating research results when the stakes were high enough. Dr. Leroy Wolins, a psychologist at Iowa State University, had a student write to thirty-seven authors of scientific reports asking for the raw data on which they based their conclusions. Of the thirty-two who replied, twenty-one said their data either been lost or accidentally destroyed. Dr. Wolins analyzed seven sets of data that did come in and found errors in three significant enough to invalidate what had been passed off as scientific fact.

Of course, research fraud is nothing new. Cyril Burt, the late British psychologist who became famous for his claims most human intelligence is determined by heredity, was exposed as a fraud by Leon Kamin, a Princeton psychologist. It seems that the “coworkers” responsible for Burt’s research findings could not be found to have actually existed! There is even evidence that Gregor Mendel, father of the gene theory of heredity, may have doctored the results of his pea-breeding experiments to make them conform more perfectly to his theory. Mendel’s conclusions were correct, but a statistical analysis of his published data shows that the odds were 10,000 to one against their having been obtained through experiments such as Mendel performed.

Doctors’ unethical behavior is not limited to the medical business. A doctor whose name is practically synonymous with development of a major surgical procedure was convicted of five counts of income tax evasion for omitting more than $250,000 from returns for 1964 through 1968. A few years ago the chairman of the Board of the American Medical Association was indicted, convicted, and sentenced to eighteen months in jail after pleading guilty to participating in a conspiracy to misuse $1.8 million in bank funds. According to the FBI, he and his codefendants had conspired to “obtain unsound indirect loans for their own interest. . .paying bank funds on checks which had insufficient funds to back them. . .and defrauding the government. . .”

Keep in mind that these shenanigans are going on at the highest levels of the medical profession. If this kind of dishonesty, fraud, and thievery is going on among the bishops and cardinals of Modern Medicine at Yale and Harvard and the National Academy of Sciences and the AMA, imagine what is going on among the parish priests at the other medical schools and medical societies!

Perhaps the most telling characteristic of the profession that is supposed to deliver health care is that doctors, as a group, appear to be sicker than the rest of society. Conservative counts peg the number of psychiatrically disturbed physicians in the U.S. at 17,000 or one in twenty, the number of alcoholics at more than 30,000, and the number of narcotics addicts at 3,500 or one percent. A thirty-year study comparing doctors with professionals of similar socio-economic and intellectual status found that by the end of the study nearly half the doctors were divorced or unhappily married, more than a third used drugs such as amphetamines, barbiturates, or other narcotics, and a third had suffered emotional problems severe enough to require at least ten trips to a psychiatrist. The control group of non-doctors didn’t fare nearly as badly.

Doctors are from thirty to one hundred times more likely than lay people to abuse narcotics, depending on the particular drug. At a semiannual meeting of the American Medical Association in 1972, surveys cited showed that nearly two percent of the doctors practicing in Oregon and Arizona had been disciplined by state licensing authorities for drug abuse. An even larger percentage got into trouble for excessive drinking. Even the AMA admits that one and one-half percent of the doctors in the United States abuse drugs. Various reform and rehabilitation measures over the years have not changed these percentages. Keep in mind that these figures represent only the identified cases. In Illinois, for example, Dr. James West, chairman of the Illinois Medical Society’s Panel for the Impaired Physician, reported that four percent rather than two percent of Illinois doctors are narcotics addicts. He further estimated that eleven-and-one-half percent were alcoholics - one in nine.

Suicide accounts for more deaths among doctors than car and plane crashes, drownings, and homicides combined. Doctors’ suicide rate is twice the average for all white Americans. Every year, about 100 doctors commit suicide, a number equal to the graduating class of the average medical school. Furthermore, the suicide rate among female physicians is neatly four times higher than that for other women over age twenty-five.

Apologists for the medical profession cite several reasons for doctors’ high rate of sickness. The drugs are easily available to them; they must work long hours under severe stress; their background and psychological makeup predisposes them to stretch their powers to the limits; and their patients and the community make excessive demands on them. Of course, whether or not you accept these reasons, they don’t explain away the fact that doctors are a very sick group of people.

Nonetheless, I prefer to look for more reasons. Fraud and corruption in the research process comes as no surprise to anyone who witnesses the lengths to which drug and formula companies go to doctors to their way of thinking. Free dinners, cocktails, conventions, and subsidized research fellowships still are only superficial explanations. When you examine the psychological and moral climate of Modern Medicine, you begin to get closer to understanding why doctors are so unhealthy.

Medical politics, for example, is a cutthroat power game of the most primitive sort. I much prefer political politics, because there you have the art of the possible, which means you have to compromise. Medical politics is the art of sheer power. There is no compromise: you go right for the jugular vein before your own is torn out. There’s no room for compromise because churches never compromise on canon law. Instead of a relatively open process in which people with different interests get together to try to get the most out of the situation that they can, in medical politics there is a rigid authoritarian power structure which can be moved only through winner-take-all power plays. Historically, doctors who have dared to change things significantly have been ostracized and have had to sacrifice their careers in order to hold to their ideas. Few doctors are willing to do either.

Another reason why doctors are less prone to compromise is because doctors tend to restrict their friendships to other doctors. Close friendships between doctors and non-doctors are nowhere near as frequent as among other professions. Consequently, doctors rarely have to defend their opinions among people who don’t share their background and who might offer a different point of view. Doctors can develop their philosophy in relative privacy, foray at intervals into the public scene to promote these ideas, and then rapidly retreat to the security of other doctors who support the views of the in-group. This luxury is not available to others in influential positions in public life.

Of course, doctors do see their patients. But they don’t see them as people. The doctor-patient relationship is more like that between the master and the slave, since the doctor depends on the complete submission of the patient. In this kind of climate, ideas can hardly be interchanged with any hope of the doctor’s being affected. Professional detachment boils down to the doctor rendering the entire relationship devoid of human influences or values. Doctors rarely rub elbows with non-doctors in any other posture but the professional.

Furthermore, since the doctor’s ambitions project him into the upper classes, that’s where his sympathies lie. Doctors identify with the upper class and beyond, even. They view themselves as the true elite class in society. The doctor’s lifestyle and professional behavior encourage autocratic thinking, so his conservative politics and economics are predictable. Most doctors are white, male, and rich—hardly in a position to relate effectively with the poor, the non-white, and females. Even doctors who come from these groups rarely return to serve and “be with” them. They, too, become white, male, and rich for all practical purposes and treat their fellows with all the paternalistic contempt other doctors do.

When asked where doctors learn these bad habits, I used to reply that doctors learned them in medical school. Now I realize they learn them much earlier than that. By the time they get to premedical training, they’ve picked up the cheating, the competition, the vying for position — all the tricks they know they need if they want to get into medical school. After all, our university system is modeled after the medical schools, and our high schools are modeled after our universities.

The admissions tests and policies of medical schools virtually guarantee that the students who get in will make poor doctors. The quantitative tests, the Medical College Admission Test, and the reliance on grade point averages funnel through a certain type of personality who is unable and unwilling to communicate with people. Those who are chosen are the ones most subject to the authoritarian influences of the priests of Modern Medicine. They have the compulsion to succeed, but not the will or the integrity to rebel. The hierarchy in control wants students who will go through school passively and ask only those questions the professors can answer comfortably. That usually means they want only one question at a time. One of the things I advise my students to do in order to survive medical school is to ask one question but never ask two.

Medical school does its best to turn smart students stupid, honest students corrupt, and healthy students sick. It isn’t very hard to turn a smart student into a stupid one. First of all, the admissions people make sure the professors will get weak-willed, authority-abiding students to work on. Then they give them a curriculum that is absolutely meaningless as far as healing or health are concerned. The best medical educators themselves say that the half-life of medical education is four years. In four years half of what a medical student has learned is wrong. Within four years of that, half again is wrong, and so on. The only problem is that the students aren’t told which half is wrong! They’re forced to learn it all. Supervision can be very close. There is no school in the country where the student-teacher ratio is as low as it is in medical school. During the last couple of years of medical school, you frequently find classes of only two or three students to one doctor. That doctor has tremendous influence over those students, through both his proximity and his life-and-death power over their careers.

Medical students are further softened up by being maliciously fatigued. The way to weaken a person’s will in order to mold him to suit your purposes is to make him work hard, especially at night, and never give him a chance to recover. You teach the rat to race. The result is a person too weak to resist the most debilitating instrument medical school uses on its students: fear.

If I had to characterize doctors, I would say their major psychological attribute is fear. They have a drive to achieve security-plus that’s never satisfied because of all the fear that’s drummed into them in medical school: fear of failure, fear of missing a diagnosis, fear of malpractice, fear of remarks by their peers, fear that they’ll have to find honest work. There was a movie some time ago that opened with a marathon dance contest. After a certain length of time all the contestants were eliminated except one. Everybody had to fail except the winner. That’s what medical school has become. Since everybody can’t win, everybody suffers from a loss of self-esteem. Everybody comes out of medical school feeling bad.

Doctors are given one reward for swallowing the fear pill so willingly and for sacrificing the healing instincts and human emotions that might help their practice: arrogance. To hide their fear, they’re taught to adopt the authoritarian attitude and demeanor of their professors. With all this pushing at one end and pulling at the other, it’s no wonder that doctors are the major sources of illness in our society. The process that begins with cheating on a biology exam by moving the microscope slide so that the next student views the wrong specimen, that continues with dropping sugar into a urine sample to change the results for those who follow, with hiring others to write papers and take exams, and with “dry labbing” experiments by fabricating results, ends with falsifying research reports in order to get a drug approved. What begins with fear and fatigue over exams and grades ends with a drug or alcohol problem. And what begins with arrogance towards others ends up as a doctor prescribing deadly procedures with little regard for the life and health of the patient.

My advice to medical students is always to get out as soon as possible and as easily as possible. The first two years of medical school are survivable because the students are relatively anonymous. The student should try his or her best to remain so, since if the professors don’t know him they can’t get to him. The last two years are more personal, but the student has more time off to recover from the assaults. If a student simply does enough work to pass and doesn’t get all wrapped up in the roller derby mentality, he or she can make it to the finish line relatively unscathed. Then, as soon as the student is eligible for a state license, I advise him to quit. Forget residency and specialty training because there the professionals have the student day and night, and he can really be brainwashed. That’s when the real making of the Devil’s priests occurs.

Doctors are only human. But so are the rest of us, and sometimes we need the services of all-too-human doctors. Because the doctor-priest acts as a mediator or a conduit between the individual and the powerful forces the individual feels he cannot face alone, a faulty conduit can result in some very powerful energy flowing into the wrong places. For example, when doctors are compared with other people in evaluating retarded and other handicapped persons, those who always give the most dismal predictions and the lowest evaluations are the doctors. Nurses are next lowest, followed by psychologists. The group that always gives the most optimistic evaluation is the parents. When I’m faced with a doctor who tells me a child can’t do certain things and parents who tell me that the child can do them, I always listen to the parents. I really don’t care which group is right or wrong. It’s the attitude that counts. Whatever attitude is reinforced and encouraged will prove true. I know doctors are prejudiced against cripples and retarded people because of their education — which teaches that anyone who is handicapped is a failure and is better off dead — so I can protect my patients myself against the doctors’ self-fulfilling prophecies of doom.

Yet doctors continue to get away with their attitude and their self-serving practices. Even though doctors derive a great deal of their economic status and power from insurance companies, the doctors are in control. So much in control, in fact, that insurance companies generally act against their own interests when the choice is that or weaken the power of doctors. Blue Cross and Blue Shield and other insurers logically should be searching for methods of decreasing unnecessary utilization of medical services. Occasionally, we see half-hearted attempts in this direction, such as the flurry of rules requiring second opinions before elective surgery, or the every-so-often policy of discontinuing reimbursement for procedures long fallen into oblivion. These efforts are more window dressing than anything else. They are introduced with considerable fanfare, rapidly generate a groundswell of controversy, and then quietly slip away. Regardless of how well-intentioned they are, they still address themselves only to the peripheral aspects of medical care and not to the areas where real money is to be saved. If insurance companies really wanted to cut costs, they would promote reimbursement for a wide range of simpler, more effective, cheaper procedures — such as home birth. And they would allow reimbursement for measures that restore and maintain health without drugs or surgery — such as diet therapy and exercise.

One of the most fascinating statistics I’ve ever run across is one that was reported by the Medical Economics Company, the publishers of the Physician’s Desk Reference. Among other questions, they asked a representative sampling of more than 1,700 people, “If you learned that your doctor had lost a malpractice suit, would it alter your opinion of him?” What amazes me is that seventy-seven percent of the people said NO!

Now I don’t really know if that means that people expect their doctors to commit malpractice or if they don’t care whether he does or not!

I do know that the insurance companies are bamboozled by the doctors into spending more money than they have to. I also know that only about seventy doctors lose their licenses every year — despite all the obvious corruption, sickness, and dangerous malpractice. Here we come to one of the truly wondrous mysteries of Modern Medicine. Despite (or because of?) all that fear and competition among medical students, doctors are extremely reluctant to report incompetent work or behavior on the part of their colleagues. If a hospital, for example, discovers malpractice by one of its doctors, the most that will happen is the doctor will be asked to resign. He won’t be reported to state medical authorities. When he seeks employment elsewhere, the hospital will most likely give him a shining recommendation.

When the famous Marcus twin-brother team of gynecologists were found dead of narcotics withdrawal during the summer of 1975, the news that the doctors were addicts came as a surprise to everyone but their colleagues. When the brothers’ “problems” were noticed the year before by the hospital staff, the twins were asked to take a leave of absence to seek medical care. When they returned to New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center, they were watched for signs that they had improved. They had not. Were they then whisked off the staff and kept out of touch with patients before anyone was seriously harmed? Were they reported to state licensing authorities? No. They were told in May that as of July 1, they would not be allowed to work in the hospital. They were found to have died within days after they lost the privilege to admit patients to the hospital.

Another favorite example of doctors allowing their colleagues to commit mayhem on unsuspecting patients occurred in New Mexico. A surgeon tied off the wrong duct in a gall bladder operation and the patient died. Although the error was discovered at autopsy, the doctor was not disciplined. Apparently, he wasn’t taught the right way to do the operation, because a few months later he performed it again, wrong — and another patient died. Again, no punishment and no surgery lesson. Only after the doctor performed the operation a third time and killed another person was there an investigation resulting in the loss of his license.

If I had to answer the question of why doctors are so reluctant to report negligence in the practice of their colleagues yet so cutthroat when it comes to medical politics and medical school competition, I go back to the basic emotions engendered in medical school: fear and arrogance. The resentment doctors are taught to feel for each other as students is transferred to the patients when the doctor finally gets into his own practice. Other doctors are no longer the enemy as long as they don’t threaten to rock the status quo through politics or research which doesn’t follow the party line. Furthermore, the old fear of failure never goes away, and since the patient is the primary threat to security — by presenting a problem which must be solved, much like a medical school test — any mistake by a single doctor threatens the security of all doctors by chalking one up for the other side. Arrogance on the part of any professional group is always directed at the outsiders that the group fears most — never at the members of the same profession.

Obviously, doctors get away with more arrogance than any other professional group. If Modern Medicine weren’t a religion, and if doctors weren’t the priests of that religion, they wouldn’t get away with anywhere near so much. Doctors get away with substantially more than priests of other religions, because of the peculiarly corrupt nature of Modern Medicine.

All religions promote and relieve guilt. To the extent that a religion is able to encourage useful behavior by promoting guilt and relieving it, that religion is “good.” A religion which promotes too much guilt and relieves too little, or which encourages the wrong kind of behavior—behavior which will not result in the improvement of the welfare of the faithful — is a “bad” religion. An example of how a religion promotes and relieves guilt is the almost universal proscription against adultery. Obviously, if religions didn’t try to make people feel that adultery was “wrong” and encourage them to feel guilty about it, more and more people would do it and necessary social structures would weaken. People wouldn’t know who their parents were, property could not be orderly transferred from generation to generation, and venereal disease could threaten the existence of an especially energetic culture.

Doctors are so powerful precisely because they have, as priests of the Church of Modern Medicine, removed all the old guilts. Modern Medicine invalidates the old guilts which, strangely enough, held people to their old religions. Nothing is a “sin” anymore, because there is a physical consequence, the doctor has the power to fix you up. If you get pregnant, the doctor can perform an abortion. If you get venereal disease, the doctor can give you penicillin. If you are gluttonous and damage your heart, the doctor can give you a coronary bypass. If you suffer from emotional problems, the doctor has Valium, Librium, and other narcotics to help you get by without caring, or feeling. If those don’t work, there are plenty of psychiatrists.

There is one “sin” that Modern Medicine will make you feel guilty about: not going to the doctor. That’s OK, because the doctor is the priest who takes away every other guilt. How much harm can there be in guilt that drives you to the doctor every time you feel sick?

The doctor-priest gets away with a lot because he can claim to be up against the very Forces of Evil. When a priest is in a touchy situation and the probability for success is dismal, he escapes blame by saying that he’s up against the Devil. The doctor-priest does the same thing. When the prognosis is not good, he retreats into his mortality and admits that he’s only a man up against the Devil Then, if he wins, he’s a hero. If he loses, he’s a defeated hero — but still a hero. Never is he seen in his true light—as the agent of the Devil.

The doctor never loses, though he plays both sides against the middle and takes bigger risks than necessary. That’s because he has succeeded in identifying his rituals as sacred and potent regardless of their real efficacy. He uses his holiest implements to raise the ante and make the game more ominous than it really needs to be. If a mother comes into the hospital with her baby in the breech position and the fetal monitor says the baby is in distress, the doctor loses time in declaring it a life-and-death situation — which, indeed, becomes once he starts to perform a Caesarean-section delivery. Biologically, the doctor knows the C-section is dangerous. But game is no longer being played by biological rules. It’s a religious game, a ceremony, and the priest calls the shots. If mother and child survive, the priest is a hero. If they die, well . . . it was a life-and-death situation anyway.

The doctor never loses: only the patients lose. The adage that a doctor buries his mistakes still applies. We used to refer mistakenly to doctors as airplane pilots. If the plane goes down, the pilot goes down with it. But the doctor never goes down with the patient.

Doctors also escape blame by claiming that their failures are caused by their successes. If you point out, for example, that a disproportionate number of premature babies seem to be turning up blind in premie nurseries, the doctor will say that it’s the price you have to pay. “Gee, we managed to save these little I- and 2-pound babies. Of course they all end up blind and deformed. They’d be dead if we didn’t save them.” Doctors use the same excuse with the problem of diabetic blindness. The reason we have so much diabetic blindness, they say, is because we have succeeded in keeping so many diabetics alive longer. Doctors will use this “we managed to keep them alive longer” excuse for every disease they have trouble treating successfully — which includes all the major causes of non-accidental death. They absolutely ignore the biological facts that creep in and point the finger at Modern Medicine’s mismanagement of both health and disease. Doctors even manage to get away with blaming their own disease on their successes. When you point to the large numbers of dishonest, unhappy, and just plain sick doctors, the excuse usually runs something like this: “The reason for the psychological disability is our tendency to be compulsive, perfectionistic, easily given to a sense of guilt if our clinical efforts fail.” A president of the American Medical Association offered that one.

Doctors protect themselves further through the sacred language of the priest. A religion must have a sacred language to separate the discourse of the priesthood from the lowly banter of the masses. After all, the priests are on speaking terms with the powers that seep the universe on course. We can’t have just anyone listening in. Sacred language of doctors is no different from jargon developed by any elitist group. Its main function is to keep outsiders ignorant. If you could understand everything your doctor was saying to you and to other doctors, his power over you would be diminished. So when you get sick because of the generally filthy conditions in the hospital, he’ll call your infection nosocomial. That way, you’ll not only not get angry at the hospital, but you’ll feel privileged to have such a distinguished sounding disease. And too scared to get mad.

Doctors use their semantic privileges to make you feel stupid and convince you that they are genuinely privy to powers that you’d better not mess with. As long as their rituals are mysterious, as long as they don’t have to justify them biologically, they can get away with anything. They’re not even subject to the laws of logic. Doctors will, for example, justify coronary bypasses by saying that everyone who has one feels better. But if you ask to be treated for cancer with laetrile because everyone you know who has been treated with it feels better, your doctor will tell you that it hasn’t been scientifically proved effective.

Semantic isolation also serves to disenfranchise the individual from the healing process. Since the patient has no hope of knowing what’s going on, let alone assisting, why allow him or her any part in the process at all? The patient gets in the way of the ritual, so get the patient out of the way. That’s one reason why doctors aren’t interested in helping patients maintain their health. To do that, they’d have to inform them rather than work on them. Doctors aren’t going to share information, because that means sharing power.

To back them up, doctors have an enormous tonnage of technological gadgets which proliferates alarmingly. First of all, the patient must stand in awe of the array of machinery the doctor assembles to attack his problem. How could any single person — other than the doctor, who has the power — hope to control such forces? Also, the electronic wizardry adds weight to the doctor’s claim that he “did everything he could.” If it’s just a doctor standing there with a black bag, “all that he could” doesn’t mean very much. But if the doctor throws the switches on $4 million worth of machinery that fills three rooms, that means he did “all that he could” and then some!

Typical of any developed religion, the ceremonial objects in which the most power is concentrated reside in the Temple. The higher the status of the temple, the more machinery within the walls. When you get to the cathedrals and the little “Vaticans” of Modern Medicine, you are up against priests who have the weight of infallibility behind them. They can do no wrong, so they are the most dangerous.

The reforms that have been introduced in an effort to solve some of the problems I’ve talked about in this chapter don’t impress me as doing very much good. Rehabilitation programs, for example, don’t really attack the roots of the sicknesses doctors seem to fall prey to. That may be a result of their shying away from exposing the problem as a disease of the core of Modern Medicine. Of course, doctors are not trained to attack the core of any problem, merely to suppress the symptoms.

Attempts to keep doctors’ knowledge up-to-date also do little good, since what doctors don’t need is more of the same kind of information they received in medical school. That’s precisely what they get in most continuing medical education programs. They’re taught by the same people who taught them in medical school. Who’s responsible for keeping them properly informed?

As I’ve already said, you have to protect yourself. To do that, you need to remember the two major attributes of doctors: fear and arrogance. What you have to do is learn how to work on his fears without challenging his arrogance until you have the winning hand. Since doctors are scared of you and what you can do to them, you shouldn’t hesitate to use that fear. Doctors are scared of lawyers, not because lawyers are so powerful but because lawyers can ally themselves with you, whom the doctor really fears. If a doctor does you dirty, sue him. It is in courts and juries that you’re most likely to find common sense. Find a good lawyer who knows a lot about medicine and who is not afraid to put a doctor through the ringer. If there’s one thing a doctor doesn’t like it’s to be in court on the wrong end of a lawyer — because that’s one place where the patient has allies that can effectively challenge the doctor’s priestly immunity. The increase in malpractice suits is encouraging, since it means more and more people are being radicalized to the point where they challenge the doctor’s power to determine the rules.

If your doctor gives you trouble but not enough to take him to court, you need to be careful about how much you challenge him —not because of what he can or cannot do to you, but because how far you go will determine your effectiveness. If a doctor threatens you and becomes angry, you should stand up to him. Don’t back down. Threaten him back. When a person really threatens a doctor, the doctor almost always backs down if the person shows that he means it. Doctors back down all the time because they figure, “What do I need this one kook for?”

It’s important, though, not to threaten a doctor unless you are prepared to carry through. In other words, don’t reveal your rebellion until you have to, until you have the emotional commitment and the physical capability to carry on a successful campaign. Don’t get into an argument with a doctor with the hope of changing his mind on anything. Never say to the doctor who’s treating you for cancer with traditional chemotherapy, “Doc, what do you think about laetrile?” You won’t get anywhere, and you won’t get any laetrile, either. Don’t say to the doctor who recommends a security bottle for your baby, “But I’m breastfeeding and I don’t want to do that.” Don’t bring your doctor columns from the newspaper expecting him to change his mind or try something new. Don’t challenge him until you’re ready with an alternative action. Do your own homework.

What does a Catholic do when he decides that his priests are no good? Sometimes he directly challenges them, but very seldom. He just leaves the Church. And that’s my answer. Leave the Church of Modern Medicine. I see a lot of people doing that today. I see a lot of people going to chiropractors, for example, who wouldn’t have been caught dead in a chiropractor’s office a few years ago.

I see more and more people patronizing the heretics of Modern Medicine.


CONFESSIONS OF A MEDICAL HERETIC
By Robert S. Mendelsohn, M.D.

Published by Contemporary Books
ISBN Number 0-8092-4131-5
Available from Amazon Books and elsewhere.

Foods and its effects on neurotransmitters for the intolerant and sensitives.

Many complain of "panick attacks." Other than the usual fight or flight regardless of stimulus, often, those symptoms are triggered by sudden release of catecholamines. It can be caused by medications, or other such as thyroid dysfunction, physiological stresses and less often, psychological.

Foods such as bananas, wine, cheese, walnuts, avocados, and in particular chicken skin, high in amines, can trigger a sudden release of catecholamines. Vanilla, Aspirin are known to be triggers. Chocolate - yummy, good for serotonin and endorphins. Increases tryptophan, precursor amino acid to serotonin, BUT, contains caffeine & theobromine, affects CNS too.

Quite a balancing act, concerning calming foods.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20382681

http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/catecholamines-14697

Useful info on which food to avoid to
up serotonin, decrease or increase dopamine and so forth:

http://www.victorie-inc.us/neurogenesis_serotonin.html

http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/catecholamines-14697

Judging by history, and more recently, various governments using the population as lab rabs, it would be naive to believe this practice has ceased.

Furthermore, there is a petition circulating around, as to why the UK government has sealed documents relating to ME/CFS, not to be made available to the public until 2072. See this petition:


http://www.thepetitionsite.com/264/--if-gte-mso-9xml-wworddocument-wviewnormalwview-wzoom0wzoom-wpunctuationkerning/

See this article in The Observer:

Millions were in germ war tests

Much of Britain was exposed to bacteria sprayed in secret trials

* The Observer, Sunday 21 April 2002 10.23 BST
* Article history

The Ministry of Defence turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public.

A government report just released provides for the first time a comprehensive official history of Britain's biological weapons trials between 1940 and 1979.

Many of these tests involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told.

While details of some secret trials have emerged in recent years, the 60-page report reveals new information about more than 100 covert experiments.

The report reveals that military personnel were briefed to tell any 'inquisitive inquirer' the trials were part of research projects into weather and air pollution.

The tests, carried out by government scientists at Porton Down, were designed to help the MoD assess Britain's vulnerability if the Russians were to have released clouds of deadly germs over the country.

In most cases, the trials did not use biological weapons but alternatives which scientists believed would mimic germ warfare and which the MoD claimed were harmless. But families in certain areas of the country who have children with birth defects are demanding a public inquiry.

Cont/...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience

New label includes latest info about vits and supps, and politics behind the efforts of Big Pharma to suppress vital important info concerning these. If well informed about the benefits, contra-indications, and side effects, these are far less toxic than meds.

Keep well informed to avoid create an imbalance!!!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, November 11, 2010


Vitamin C And The Law
A Personal Viewpoint by Thomas E. Levy, M.D., J.D.

(OMNS November 11, 2010) As a patient, you have the right to any therapy that is not prohibitively expensive, established to be effective, and not prohibitively toxic.

Any physician, or panel of hospital-based physicians, claiming that vitamin C is experimental, unapproved, and/or posing unwarranted risks to the health of the patient, is really only demonstrating a complete and total ignorance or denial of the scientific literature. A serious question as to what the real motivations might be in the withholding of such a therapy then arises.

A doctor has the right to refuse to see you or treat you. A doctor does not have the right to deny you any therapy that is inexpensive and known to be effective and nontoxic; if there is toxicity involved, the patient can discharge his responsibility for such toxicity with proper informed consent. A doctor does not have the right to deny you consultation with another doctor that may have conflicting medical points of view.

Just as ignorance of the law is no sound defense to legal charges brought against you, ignorance of medical fact is ultimately no sound defense for a doctor withholding valid treatment, especially when that information can be easily accessed

While a hospital may or may not have a legal right to dictate to its physicians what they may or may not do, the patient and the family of the patient have the legal right to sue that hospital for any negative outcome that is perceived to directly result from such interference in patient care.

The patient and the family of the patient also have the right to sue any physician that refuses to administer an inexpensive, nontoxic therapy that is established to be of use in the medical literature, such as vitamin C, especially when no other options other than permitting the patient to die are offered. Doctors have a very strong herd mentality, and they do not thrive well when forced to deal with a lawsuit alone, and possibly not even with the backup of their malpractice insurance company, which would seriously question why an approved medicine such as vitamin C was withheld from the patient. Remember that any insurance company always looks for a legal way not to pay expenses or settlements.

In a court of law, legal decisions regarding medical issues are usually decided by comparing a doctor's actions (or inactions) to the accepted standards of medical practice in the community in question. The legal sticking points relate to how different that community might be from others, and whether the accepted standard of practice is too far deviated from overall mainstream medicine norms.

The legal system struggles with reconciling something well-established in the medical literature, but not reflected in the standard medical textbooks. A case involving withheld vitamin C would not currently have any direct legal precedent of which I am aware, but there are multiple reasons to believe that the time is ripe for the law to rule for the patient's right to receive vitamin C in the hospital over the doctor's "right" to withhold it.

The time for changing the view of vitamin C by the law and mainstream medicine has arrived. Over the past 20 years, many more doctors have begun to routinely give 50 grams (50,000 mg) or more of vitamin C intravenously on a regular basis to patients with the entire gamut of medical conditions. These doctors have come from the same medical schools and postgraduate training programs as their unlike-minded mainstream counterparts, meaning they have the same traditional credentials and warrant equal consideration.

The law recognizes that there is no one perfect medical approach to a patient. Having an increasingly large body of doctors who recognize the importance of vitamin C will allow the courts to permit an additional "school of thought" as long as enough traditionally-trained doctors think that way. The question yet to be legally determined is, How many such doctors is "enough?"

Under United States law, the long-standing Frye standard (1923) held that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is admissible only where the technique is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific community. This standard made it almost impossible for any technique embraced by a minority, however competent or appropriately trained, to ever coexist with, much less supersede, a technique embraced by the larger scientific community. Basically, majority always wins, and minority always loses.

The Daubert standard (1993) finally replaced the Frye standard.
Daubert held that the court should:

1. Evaluate whether the science can be or has been tested
2. Determine whether the science has been published or peer-reviewed
3. Consider the likelihood of error (quality and quantity of the data)
4. Evaluate the general acceptance of the theory in the scientific community
If the court is so inclined, the evaluation of general acceptance in the scientific (medical) community does not have to invoke the "majority rules" nature of the earlier Frye standard. Rather, it can allow the consideration that enough scientific studies embraced by enough qualified doctors could prevail legally. However, any final ruling would be heavily dependent on the particular facts of the case and the precise intervention requested of the court.

The principles of Daubert do not assure a victory for vitamin C proponents in a court of law, but they do allow an objective judge to see that the body of evidence supporting vitamin C usage is clearly established in the mainstream medical literature, warranting a thorough legal evaluation as to why it is not yet a permissible therapy. These principles allow for much more flexibility than the earlier Frye "majority rules" standard.

Also, with any individual case in which a doctor refuses to administer vitamin C and serious damage (including death) occurs, a strong legal case can be now be made that the burden of proof falls with the doctor to show:

1. That the therapy was exceptionally expensive, toxic, and/or unproven
2. That the patient's best interests were somehow best served by withholding vitamin C
Always try to make an alliance with your doctor and avoid an adversarial relationship if at all possible. Theoretically, if your doctor really wants to do what is best for the patient and is not more concerned with being told what to do, much stress and conflict can be avoided by all. However, do not hesitate to let your doctor know directly that you will avail yourself of all your rights or your family member's rights as a patient to optimal health care if so forced.

A very common "out" in all of these scenarios is to suggest that "further studies" should be done. More information is always useful, but vitamin C has already been researched more than any other supplement, or even most pharmaceutical drugs, in the history of the planet. Don't allow another 70 years of research to transpire before its proper use begins.

Stand up for your rights today. The way medicine is practiced will never change until the public demands it and the law legitimizes it. Remember, it's your body and your health. Doctors are answerable to you, not you to them.


Thomas Edward Levy, M.D., J.D. is a graduate of the Tulane University School of Medicine and the University of Denver College of Law. He board certified in Internal Medicine and is also a Fellow of the American College of Cardiology. He was admitted to the Colorado Bar in 1998 and the District of Columbia Bar in 1999. Dr. Levy is on the Editorial Board of the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service.



References:

Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923)
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993)

An expanded version of "Vitamin C and the Law" by Dr. Levy is available as a free pdf download at http://www.tomlevymd.com/downloads/VC.NZ.Sept.2010.pdf or http://www.doctoryourself.com/VC.NZ.Sept.2010.pdf



Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine

Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org

The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and non-commercial informational resource.



Editorial Review Board:

Ian Brighthope, M.D. (Australia)
Ralph K. Campbell, M.D. (USA)
Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D. (Canada)
Damien Downing, M.D. (United Kingdom)
Michael Ellis, M.D. (Australia)
Michael Gonzalez, D.Sc., Ph.D. (Puerto Rico)
Steve Hickey, Ph.D. (United Kingdom)
James A. Jackson, Ph.D. (USA)
Bo H. Jonsson, M.D., Ph.D. (Sweden)
Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D. (USA)
Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm.D. (Puerto Rico)
Erik Paterson, M.D. (Canada)
Gert E. Shuitemaker, Ph.D. (Netherlands)
Jagan Nathan Vamanan, M.D. (India)

Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D. (USA), Editor and contact person.
Email: omns@...


To Subscribe at no charge: http://www.orthomolecular.org/subscribe.html

Please take note. Its well known that certain foods can and does affect glutamate receptors see this post: http://adr-centralreactiontomedications.blogspot.com/search/label/Brain%20and%20receptors%20%20EMS

I have been doing quite a lot of research concerning methylation, and am convinced, that this approach to regaining and preserving health is important for many of us. Some tips below, which may be helpful, concerning Glutamate and GABA, foods to avoid, food to eat, and some supps.

Copper inhibits conversion of glutamate to GABA by glutamate decarboxylase so avoid copper excess, or better stated, an imbalance between copper and zinc.

For those with normal to low level Vitamin D3, yep, that again, it is advised to take it for maintenance of Dopamine level, if that is low too. It stimulates the enzymes that generate dopamine level.

(Those who did some type of nutrigenomic testing: A COMT + or COMT ++ )(higher Dopamine), is favorable in the sense that this helps defend/tolerance against heavy metals, microbes and keep moods elevated.

Below is a short list of food excitory for (Glutamate-Gaba imbalance) those sensitive to glutamate:

Avoid these foods:

Sources of Excitotoxins

Monosodium Glutamate
Glutamate
Natural Flavor(s)
Maltodextrin
Carrageenan
Gelatin
Spice(s)
Seasoning(s)
Seasoned Salt
Dough Conditioner(s) Isolate
Autolyzed Yeast
Autolyzed Yeast Extract
Autolyzed Anything
Broth
Stock, Soup Base
Chicken/Pork/Beef “Flavoring”, Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein (HPV)
Hydrolyzed Plant Protein, Hydrolyzed Oat Flour,, Hydrolyzed Anything
Yeast Extract, Sodium Caseinate, Calcium Caseinate, aseinate
Disodium Guanyiate, Disodium Inosinate, Disodium Caseinate
Hydrolyzed Protein, Chicken/Pork/Beef “Base”
Bouillon, Vegetable Gum,
Plant Protein Extract
Smoke Flavoring(s)
Malted Barley Flour, Malt Extract, Malt Flavoring(s), Malted Barley, Malted Anything
Textured Protein
Guar Gum
Soy Extract, Soy Protein, Soy Protein Concentrate, Soy Sauce
Whey Protein, Whey Protein Isolate, Whey Protein oncentrate
L-Cysteine
Ajinomoto
Kombu Extract
Natural Flavoring(s)
Barley Malt


What would help:

Pycnogenol and grape seed extract help balance Glutamate/GABA
Taurine helps in this balance (but contains sulfur so avoid if CBS (+)
Montief GABA
ZEN supplement which contains GABA and L threanine
Contains threanine, which has methyl groups; avoid if COMT (+)

I don't understand why it says to avoid threanine (iuf you are COMT +), which is found in green tea. It is supposed to increase alpha waves in the brain, is a caffeine antagonist, and is a relaxant. [url]http://www.vrp.com/articles.aspx?ProdID=art889&zTYPE=2[/url]

It also increases dopamine, GABA and reverses damage of glutamate excitotixicity. Which also, lowers, blood pressure.


Foods High In Serotonin (or Amino Acid Precursor Tryptophan)

Turkey, Chicken, Chicken Liver, Tofu, Almonds, Peanuts, Soy Nuts, Milk, Yoghurt, Cottage cheese, Spirulina (seaweed), Brewer’s yeast, Watermelon Seeds


Foods High In Dopamine (or Amino Acid Precursor Tyrosine)

Bananas, Red plums, Figs, Raisins
Eggplant, Green Bean pods, Italian broad beans
Salami, Sausage, Liver
Commercial gravies and Soy sauce
Salted dried fish (Herring, Cod)
Canned meats, Aged game
Canned meats, Aged game
Homemade yeast breads
Some alcoholic beverages (not all)
Yeast concentrates, Marmite, soup cubes
Aged Cheese (Blue, Boursalt, Brick, Brie, Camembert, Cheddar, Colby, Emmental, Gouda,
Mozarella, Parmisan, Provolone, Romano, Roquefort, and Stilton

http://heartfixer.com/AMRI-Nutrigenomics.htm

For those who have no sensitivities, and not done the nutrigenomic text or detoxigenomic test, good brain food list:

1. Acai berries
2. Almonds
3. Avocados
4. Bananas
5. Blackberries
6. Blueberries
7. Brewer’s yeast
8. Broccoli
9. Brown rice
10. Brussels sprouts
11. Cantaloupe
12. Cashews
13. Cauliflower
14. Cherries
15. Cheese
16. Chicken
17. Collard greens
18. Cranberries
19. Dark chocolate
20. Eggs
21. Eggplant
22. Fish
23. Flaxseed oil
24. Green Tea
25. Lean beef
26. Legumes
27. Milk
28. Oatmeal
29. Oranges
30. Peanut butter
31. Peas
32. Plums
33. Potatoes
34. Pumpkin seeds
35. Raspberries
36. Red cabbage
37. Red grapes
38. Romaine lettuce
39. Salmon
40. Soybeans
41. Spinach
42. Stabilized rice bran
43. Strawberries
44. Tomatoes
45. Tuna
46. Turkey
47. Walnuts
48. Water
49. Wheat germ
50. Yogurt


50 ways to kill your brain cells:

1) Sniffing paint — Yes, sniffing paint will give you a “high” for awhile, but it can really inflict severe brain damage. Avoid inhalants like paint and keep your brain cells healthy. Even worse than just killing your brain cells is the fact that sniffing paint has the potential to kill you — even on your first time. Stay away from this stuff and get help now if you are addicted.

2) Taking cocaine – Thank you captain obvious, right? It’s possible that not everyone out there knew that cocaine killed brain cells. Cocaine doesn’t just kill random brain cells either, it wipes out the brain cells in your brain’s pleasure center — brain cells that make you feel good and are triggered with positive emotion and pleasure. Want to keep having fun in life and feel pleasure? Stay away from cocaine.

3) Too much stress — A little bit of stress is healthy for everyone. It keeps you motivated and motivated to achieve goals. When stress gets out of hand to the point where you’re having adrenaline rushes, your body produces an excess of the chemical “cortisol.” Too much of that cortisol is what kills brain cells. Please don’t stress after reading this.

4) Getting a concussion – Unfortunately most people don’t have much control over getting concussions. The fact is, concussions are neuronal killers and should be avoided if at all possible. There are special precautions to take to avoid concussions such as: wearing a helmet in contact sports, wearing a helmet when riding your motorcycle, even wearing a helmet when riding your bike.

5) Rapidly shaking your head – Rapidly shaking your head around back and forth causes axons to tear, which causes brain cell death. A very easy way to prevent brain cell loss is by NOT shaking your head. You have complete control over the shaking of your head; don’t do it!

6) Eating junk food — What happens to your brain cells when they aren’t provided with the healthy nutrients they need to survive? They starve and die! A little bit of junk food won’t hurt, but unhealthy food on a consistent basis without any healthy food will cause brain cells to die. Again, you have complete control over what you choose to eat. Pick healthy foods and give your brains the adequate nutrients that they need to flourish.

7) Drinking too much alcohol — How many brain cells does one beer kill? Chances are good that drinking just one beer won’t kill any. Getting drunk probably won’t even kill any brain cells. Alcohol can cause a temporary chemical imbalance and structural changes. If you are an alcoholic or you frequently “drink too much alcohol,” you will most likely kill brain cells. MRI’s of alcoholic patients show a decreased brain volume.

8) Taking ecstacy (MDMA) – Common-day club drug, Ecstacy literally puts holes in your brain. Brain scans have compared healthy brains to brains of those who’ve used ecstacy and have found that the “brains on ecstacy” had holes in them. Ecstacy depletes serotonin manufacturing cells, which are important for keeping a positive mood and promoting relaxation. If you frequently go “clubbing” make the choice to stay away from “X,” as it is very common in clubs. Avoid this drug, and your brain will be much healthier than if you didn’t.

9) Dehydration – Without sufficient levels of water in the brain, ions get disrupted and the result is brain damage. Replenish your body and brain with necessary water levels to avoid dehydration and keep your brain cells healthy.

10) Using methamphetamines – Taking methamphetamines is probably the most uneducated decision you could possibly make. Not only are they one of the most addicting groups of drugs, they destroy lives and kill brain cells. The sad part is, methamphetamine use results in severe to permanent brain damage even long after the drug has been stopped. In my opinion, methamphetamines are the most dangerous group of drugs to get involved with. Stay away from them, get help now if you use them, and help a friend if you know they are a user.

11) Getting a contusion – A contusion is a severe bruise within the brain. It does cause neuronal death (brain cell death). Unfortunately, most people that have contusions couldn’t really do much to avoid them. Sports like boxing where taking jabs to the head is common, influences the development of contusions. Safety precautions: wear a helmet or hardhat when debris or other objects have potential to damage your head. The great-est Mohammed Ali suffered brain contusions from his heavy involvement in boxing.

12) Having a stroke – A stroke results from temporary loss of blood-flow to the brain. Usually, the damage from having a stroke is centralized in just one side of the brain. Strokes can cause anything from small lesions, to widespread cell death. Unfortunately strokes cannot be avoided, but there are things that you can do to reduce your risk: lowering stress levels and staying active are just a couple healthy activities that reduce risk of a stroke. An interesting fact: millions of brain cells die each minute a stroke is left untreated.

13) Avoiding exercise — The act of avoiding exercise doesn’t kill brain cells, however, the effects that are associated with lack of exercise happen to be killers. Exercise reduces stress levels, chance of brain damage, and even creates new brain cells. If you are avoiding exercise, you happen to be setting your brain cells up for an early death. Make time in your schedule to exercise and reap the benefits; exercise should never be avoided.

14) Sensory deprivation – We know from my “hearing voices” article that sensory deprivation may cause you to have auditory hallucinations. When your brain undergoes sensory deprivation for longer periods of time, you lose brain cells. When cells are not stimulated for long periods of time, your brain reorganizes itself; you naturally lose the unused, understimulated cells.

15) Taking absinthe — Most types of absinthe contain extremely high amounts of ethanol and a chemical called thujone; both of which can cause brain cell death. Thujone has the opposite effects of barbiturates like Xanax and in high doses can cause seizures and possibly death. It is definitely best to avoid absinthe and not put your brain at risk of damage.

16) Drinking too much water — The act of drinking too much water in too short of time period will actually flood your nervous system and kill off brain cells. How exactly does this work? When the ratio of water to sodium escalates, your brain swells and brain cells die in the process. Individuals on low-sodium diets may be especially vulnerable to “water toxicity.” It is important to stay hydrated, but be reasonable; you know what’s right for your body. Don’t go overboard and kill off your brain cells!

17) Being a chronic negative thinker — The act of simply thinking negative will not cause any sort of brain cell loss. Most people have negative thoughts that creep in their consciousness from time to time. It is when the negative thinking takes over, gets “out of line” and causes stress, and you to make unwise decisions such as taking drugs like Ecstacy to improve your mood at the club when you are probably losing brain cells. The side-effects and byproducts from negative thoughts are what make you more likely to engage in activities that kill brain cells. Negative thinking is an indirect killer; surround yourself with positivity and a healthy circle of friends!

18) Post traumatic stress disorder – Victims of post-traumatic stress disorder unfortunately deal with memory problems, anxiety, flashbacks, and happen to lose brain cells in the process. Post traumatic stress disorder causes the brain to produce a surplus of the stress hormone “cortisol,” which kills brain cells. Like other stress related disorders, they don’t lose a huge amount of brain cells overnight, but they definitely can lose a significant amount if they don’t get adequate assistance and treatment.

19) Head trauma – The scary thing about head trauma is that it not only kills brain cells, it also damages the brain’s ability to repair itself after the damage. Head trauma is linked to Parkinson’s disease and poor sensorimotor processing within the brain — always try to protect your head whenever engaging in a contact sport, working construction, riding a motorcycle, etc.

20) Elevated testosterone levels — Having too high of testosterone levels has been proven to be detrimental to your brain’s health and does kill brain cells. If you are taking supplements that increase testosterone levels, be aware that too much of the supplement could potentially cause the death of your brain cells!

21) Chemotherapy — Unfortunately for those who have undergone chemotherapy, the process not only kills the cancerous cells, but many of your good brain cells. In order to avoid cancer, take steps to reduce your risk of developing cancer such as: eating healthy, exercising, getting proper sleep, etc. Not everyone is able to avoid cancer, but you can certainly make an effort to try.

22) A single stressful event — Yes, you read correct — just ONE stressful event has the potential to kill off brain cells. If you live in a high-stress environment, are always on the go, and never take time to just chill, your mind is most likely overactive and you are losing brain cells. If you know that you will be exposed to stressful events, I recommend learning stress coping methods like meditation, deep breathing, guided imagery, yoga, etc. There are many things you can do to lower your stress response to hectic events.

23) Smoking cigarettes — The act of smoking cigarettes is not only detrimental to your physical health — it could be taking a heavy toll on your mental health. The fact is, scientists have found that “smoking” kills brain cells and stops the production of new brain cells (neurogenesis). If you are a smoker, work hard to kick the habit. If you are smoke-free, stay that way and encourage smokers to quit.

24) Taking steroids — Taking steroids is terrible for your brain and body. Steroids elevate testosterone levels and increase stress levels: 2 activities [mentioned earlier] that are known to deplete brain cell. Steroids cause early death, an increased suicide risk, and give the user absolutely ZERO fulfillment in the long-term. Take the time to lift the necessary weights and don’t expect to get “ripped” overnight; you will be better off in the grand scheme of life.

25) Extreme anxiety and panic — Anxiety and panic in extreme situations will definitely provoke feelings of stress, release cortisol, and will kill your brain cells in severe forms. Light and moderate forms of anxiety and panic may feel uncomfortable, but will probably not damage your brain. Learning valuable coping techniques by visiting a psychotherapist, using relaxation techniques consistently, and considering medication are all things that will stop you from losing brain cells from anxiety and panic.

26) Food additives — Food additives contain a group of compounds commonly referred to as “exotoxins,” which slow and destroy cognitive development in the brain. “Exotoxins” are not just present in a few foods, they are present in virtually ALL processed foods. To avoid future health problems and keep a healthy brain, your best bet is to eat healthy, non-processed foods.

27) Oxycodone abuse — Oxycodone abuse kills brain cells, heart tissue, damages kidneys, and has terrible side-effects. If you or someone you know abuses Oxycodone, seek help immediately! Your brain and body will thank you in the long run — Oxycodone is nothing to fool around with.

28) Exposure to electricity — Short and long-term exposure to electricity has terrible effects on your brain. Electricity doesn’t just cause you to lose a few brain cells either, it causes you to lose millions! If you or anyone you know works with electricity on a consistent basis, you may want to take special precautions or reconsider!

29) Exposure to lead — It is known that the early exposure of lead may lead to later brain aging in life. What about brain cell loss from lead exposure? Scientific evidence shows that exposure to lead leads to brain cell loss and damage years later. Scientists figure that a single exposure is equivalent to at least 5 years of brain aging. Avoid lead exposure at all possible costs and do what you’ve got to do to keep your brain healthy!

30) Mercury toxicity — Chances are good that you probably know that avoiding exposure to mercury is recommended. When a person is exposed to mercury, they can develop what’s known as “mercury toxicity” in the brain. Mercury toxicity is a known brain cell killer. I find it interesting that many old, tooth-fillings could be releasing mercury into your body and you could be a victim of mercury poisoning. To watch a boring, yet informative research video about mercury poisoning, check out this video.

31) Carbon monoxide poisoning — Yes carbon monoxide itself can kill brain cells, but the reason brain cells die in carbon monoxide poisoning is mostly due to the fact that inadequate amounts of oxygen get to the brain. To avoid carbon monoxide poisoning, take necessary household precautions such as installing a detector and check for burning.

32) Getting Lyme disease — Severe forms of Lyme disease cause memory impairments and brain cell loss if left untreated for a long period of time. Lyme disease is usually carried by deer ticks, but can be found in other types of ticks. To avoid Lyme disease, it is recommended to always check your body after long expeditions through the woods.

33) Exposure to pesticides — It is always important to take the necessary precautions when working with pesticides or being in an area around pesticides. Pesticides kill brain cells quickly and cause abnormal mental and physical development. If you are in an environment where pesticide exposure is common, get out, save yourself, or report the company and people using the pesticides to proper authorities. Pesticides are linked to Parkinson’s disease and many other forms of mental illness!

34) Certain types of cosmetics – Certain types of cosmetics have been proven to have an adverse interaction with mental health. Some forms of shampoo have ingredients that have been shown to kill brain cells. Be aware that certain types of cosmetics have ingredients that will kill or damage your brain cells.

35) Using cleaning solvents — Taking a good whiff of a solvent can really knock you out! If “sniffed” with the purpose to get high, solvents can cause severe brain damage and possibly death. They can cause severe learning impairments, declined social functioning, and reduce the capacity of your short-term memory. Most cleaning solvents, when used properly for their intended purpose (to clean), will not cause any harm. If you know someone that is abusing solvents, get them help! You are not only helping their brain, you are helping their life!

36) Ingesting aspartame — In case you didn’t know, aspartame is an artificial sweetener found in gum, candy, and Nutra-Sweet. Several studies made connections that link aspartame to brain cell destruction. It is a very controversial substance that has been proven to be bad for health in some studies, and has been proven safe in others. Either way, I’d avoid aspartame; it’s nothing to risk your brain cells over.

37) Indoor air pollution — Indoor air pollution affects the spinal cord, kidneys, blood cells, central nervous system, and the brain. Depending on the type of indoor air pollution, effects can range from being unnoticeable to causing brain cell loss. It is important to keep the air inside of your home and business clean and safe to breathe. Don’t underestimate the potential of indoor air pollution to be detrimental to the health of your body and mind!

38) Lack of quality sleep — We all know that when we don’t get enough sleep, we cannot properly function the next day! Not only does lack of quality sleep interfere with learning and social functions (left-hemisphere), it does kill brain cells. In order to prevent brain cell loss from lack of sleep, it is recommended to get good quality sleep. Some people run effectively on just 6 hours of sleep, while some need 9 to keep a clear head. You be the judge of what works best for your body and brain!

39) Using heroin – As you probably expected, using heroin will kill your brain cells. Heroin has been linked to Alzheimer-like brain damage. Opiate use has been associated with sped up aging in the brain. Heroin causes nerve-cell damage in essential parts of the brain. Don’t let a drug like Heroin ruin your brain and your life!

40) Paint remover — When you put paint remover on paint, it eats it away. When you inhale paint remover, it eats away at your brain! Paint remover, when sniffed, crosses the blood-brain barrier and eats away at your brain tissue and cells. Make the decision to help others that have a problem with “sniffing” or “huffing” paint remover by getting them psychological assistance and being around for support.

41) Welding fumes — Exposure to welding fumes is an extreme health hazard. Welding rod fumes have been linked to Parkinson’s disease and many other illnesses. Most fumes from welding are produced during “arc-welding.” The fumes enter and damage your lungs, nervous system, and deplete brain cells. If you are a welder, you may want to check out this informational guide from the American Society of Safety Engineers.

42) Outdoor air pollution – Like indoor air pollution, outdoor air pollution can have terrible side-effects. Places like Mexico City have so much air pollution that many citizens chose to wear masks and filters to protect themselves. Depending on the type and severity of the air pollution, you can potentially lose a lot of brain tissue. Chemical gases build up quickly and mix with each other, those gases get trapped in the environment, people inhale the gases, and brain damage / cell loss is a result.

43) Microwaving “popcorn” — It doesn’t really matter what you are microwaving, if you stand close enough to the microwave or have a “microwave” leakage, you are killing your brain cells. By just standing close to a microwave that is fully sealed while operating, you do risk losing some brain cells — but not nearly as many as if there were a microwave leakage. It is important to always check up on your microwave and to repair any possible leaks. It is recommended to always stand a minimum of 2 feet away from microwaves while they are cooking.

44) Having narcolepsy – Having narcolepsy — a disorder characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness and uncontrollably falling asleep at random times. Research has shown that having narcolepsy kills “hypocretin” brain cells which are located in the hippocampus. Individuals without narcolepsy have around 70,000 hypocretin brain cells, while narcoleptics have have between 3,000 to 10,000 (a significantly lower amount). Luckily new advances and treatments are constantly being developed to help with narcolepsy!

45) Formaldehyde — Formaldehyde can be found in forest fires, automobile exhaust, and tobacco smoke. Formaldehyde can deplete brain cells and decreases cell counts within the brain. Formaldehyde exposure can cause burning of the eyes and nose, coughing, difficulty breathing, and could possibly cause leukemia. For great physical and mental health, formaldehyde exposure should be avoided.

46) Radiation treatment — It is not surprising that radiation treatment damages brain cells. After all, radiation treatment works to damage the DNA of cancerous cells. Some other cells happen to get hit with the radiation intended to take out the cancer cells, and healthy brain cells die. Most medically accepted treatments of cancer involve the killing of both healthy and unhealthy brain cells.

47) Taking the chemical MPTP — MPTP is a neurotoxin that causes permanent symptoms of Parkinson’s disease by killing neurons in the substantia nigra area of the brain. It’s scary that there’s an illicit drug like this… Hopefully you never even hear about MPTP other than on the internet.

48) Laughing gas a.K.a. nitrous oxide — When nitrous oxide is used in a controlled setting like the dentist’s office, it is fine and will not cause brain damage — the amount of the substance is carefully monitored. It is when nitrous oxide is illicitly used and abused that results in brain damage and cell loss. No need to freak out the next time the dentist uses this stuff. Don’t use this stuff in a non-medical setting and you’ll be fine.

49) Using ketamine – The use of ketamine, a common type of anesthesia, prevents brain cells from picking up “glutamate” — a protein which is essential for cell communication and survival. Like nitrous oxide, ketamine use should be limited to medical professionals. Using the proper amount of ketamine probably won’t do much damage.

50) Taking PCP – Most commonly referred to as “angel dust,” the drug PCP (Phencyclidine) can cause memory problems, inability to control thoughts, and compulsive action. PCP has been correlated with frontal-lobe brain damage and like most drugs, aids in the process of brain cell death. PCP is dangerous, triggers dangerous behavior, and should be avoided to keep a healthy brain.

There are more drugs and activities that weren’t mentioned that kill brain cells.

http://4mind4life.com/blog/2008/07/18/brain-foods-list-of-50-good-brain-foods/

Flu season is upon us. Thinking of flu shots? As can be seen on CDC site this year, they have incorporated the infamous H1N1 vaccine in the mix. :o yep, just to make sure .. Same in the UK, I am not sure about other countries.

Took an FQ, then Mefloquine, and five vaccines, end of 1996, early 1997. I reacted to tetanus which was given to me twice. Strangely, 13 years after the polio jab, the antibodies are extremely high. To date, no immunologists, and doctors have been able to tell me why.

Fast forward. I saw a Chinese TCM doc two weeks ago. I didn't tell her that I had my polio antibodies checked on a hunch two years ago. According to the TCM doctor, a lot of my symptoms and LT illness is caused by damage from vaccines. I didn't tell her that the antibodies for the polio vaccine 13 years were sky high when I had it checked two years ago.

She went saying that she believes that there was damage from FQ and Lariam, but that the prolongation of symptoms, illness and heart failure is a direct cause of the vaccines. I haven't told her about the very high antibodies of the polio 13 years later, but will do so during the next consultation.

I was told by a prominent microbiologist that I suffer from several mycoplasma infections. Tests are unreliable. Unfortunately, I could not start on his recommended antibiotics regimen, since they were Fluorquiolone antibiotics ;D

Read up Dr Garth Nicholson, Dr Shreibner, Dr Haarlvorsten et al
(all have impressive CVs and are well respected scientists)

Here are some informative vids about the truth concerning vaccines:



This vid is one of 10

Still have faith in "Research" ????

This article below concerns fabricated research, in particular,
analgesics!!

See excerpt from article below:

A New Low in Drug Research: 21 Fabricated Studies

......../ "Some of the studies reported favorable results from use of Pfizer’s Bextra and Merck’s Vioxx, both painkillers that have since been pulled from the market. Others offered good news about Pfizer’s pain drugs Lyrica and Celebrex and Wyeth’s antidepressant Effexor XR. Doctors said Reuben’s work was particularly influential in pain treatment and that they were shocked by the news.

“We are left with a large hole in our understanding of this field,” Steven Shafer, editor-in-chief of Anesthesia and Analgesia, told Anesthesiology News, which first reported on the retractions. “There are substantial tendrils from this body of work that reach throughout the discipline of postoperative pain management.”

Cont/.. http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2009/03/11/a-new-low-in-drug-research-21-fabricated-studies/

Oxygen Therapy detrimental for some

For those who are healthy, they may suffer no ill effects. For some of us, producing high level of free radicals, it may cause even worse symptoms.

The first time I was given oxygen, it made me ill with various symptoms lasting many weeks. The symptoms were very similar to oxidative stress, meaning, I could feel a high level of free radicals very similar post minimal physical exertion and/or high level of air pollution. Thereafter, whenever I was offered oxygen, I refused it.

This article explains why some of us may not benefit from oxygen therapy. Although, I was given small dose of oxygen, it had a detrimental effect on my health. For some of us, even a small dose of oxygen will produce too high levels of nitric oxide (NO), resulting in even higher peroxynitrite - harmful.


See excerpt from an article below:

"We knew it was bad but we did not know why," Su said. The good news is they may also have a solution.

Researchers found that within five days, mice placed in small oxygen chambers that mimic oxygen levels given in intensive care have dramatically elevated levels of peroxynitrite in their lungs. Free radicals, such as peroxynitrite, result from oxygen use and are safe at low levels. While it's a given that oxygen therapy produces free radicals, the significant increase in peroxynitrite was not known.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101005104335.htm

.

Interview with Peter Breggin, MD,
a psychiatrist denouncing the psychiatric profession and
psychotropics, articulating the futility of DNA and
amino tests etc. Dr Breggin is one of many neuropharmacologists,
psychologists, psychiatrists exposing this fraud.







Part I




Part II




Part III




Health Last Updated: Aug 26th, 2010 - 00:35:19

America’s mental illness epidemic: It turns out that the drugs are the problem
By Gary G. Kohls, MD
Online Journal Contributing Writer

http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=4946057639976740841&postID=868173407396183409







Aug 26, 2010, 00:19

Email this article
Printer friendly page

Tens of millions of innocent, unsuspecting Americans, who are mired deeply in the mental “health” system, have actually been made crazy by the use of or the withdrawal from commonly-prescribed, brain-altering, brain-disabling, indeed brain-damaging psychiatric drugs that have been, for many decades, cavalierly handed out like candy -- often in untested and therefore unapproved combinations of drugs -- to trusting and unaware patients by equally unaware but well-intentioned physicians who have been under the mesmerizing influence of slick and obscenely profitable psychopharmaceutical drug companies, a.k.a. BigPharma.

That is the conclusion of two books by investigative journalist and health science writer Robert Whitaker. His first book, entitled Mad in America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine and the Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill noted that there has been a 600 percent increase (since Thorazine was introduced in the US in the mid-1950s) in the total and permanent disabilities of millions of psychiatric drug-takers. This uniquely First World mental ill health epidemic has resulted in the life-long taxpayer-supported disabilities of rapidly increasing numbers of psychiatric patients who are now unable to be happy, productive, taxpaying members of society. Whitaker has done a powerful, albeit unwelcome job of presenting previously hidden, but very convincing evidence to support his thesis, that it is the drugs and not the diagnosis that is causing the epidemic of mental illness disability. Many open-minded physicians and many aware psychiatric patients are now motivated to be wary of any and all synthetic chemicals that can cross the blood/brain barrier because all of them are capable of altering the brain in ways totally unknown to medical science, especially when the patients are taking the drugs long-term. .

In Whitaker’s second book Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America, he goes much further in advancing this sobering reality. He documents the history of the powerful forces behind the relatively new field of psychopharmacology and its major shaper and beneficiary, BigPharma. Psychiatric drugs, whose developers, marketers and salespersons are all in the employ of the giant drug companies, are far more dangerous than the drug and psychiatric industries are willing to admit: These drugs, it turns our, are fully capable of disabling -- often permanently -- body, brain and spirit.

More evidence to support Whitaker’s well-documented claims are laid out in two important new books written by psychiatrist and scholar Grace Jackson. Jackson did a beautiful job of researching and documenting, from the voluminous basic neuroscience research (which is uniformly ignored by the clinical sciences) the unintended and often disastrous consequences of the chronic ingestion of any of the five major classes of psychiatric drugs. Her second and most powerful book: Drug-Induced Dementia: A Perfect Crime, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt, that any of the five classes of drugs that are commonly used in psychiatric patients (antidepressants, antipsychotics, psychostimulants, tranquilizers and anti-seizure/”mood-stabilizer” drugs) have shown microscopic, macroscopic, biochemical, clinical and/or radiological evidence of brain shrinkage and other signs of brain damage, which can result in clinically-diagnosable, permanent dementia, premature death and a variety of other related brain disorders that can mimic mental illnesses. Jackson’s first book, Rethinking Psychiatric Drugs: A Guide for Informed Consent was an equally sobering book warning about the many hidden dangers of psychiatric drugs.

This sad truth is that the seemingly knee-jerk prescribing (without very much information being given to patients about the long list of serious long-term adverse effects) of potent and often addicting/dependency-inducing psychiatric drugs has become the standard of care in American psychiatry since the introduction of the so-called anti-schizophrenic “miracle” drug Thorazine in the mid-1950s. (Thorazine was the offending drug that all of Jack Nicholson’s fellow patients were coerced into taking at “medication time” in the Academy Award-winning movie “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.”) Thorazine and all the other “me-too” early antipsychotic drugs are now universally known to have been an iatrogenic (= doctor or other treatment-caused) disaster because of their serious long-term, initially unsuspected, brain-damaging effects that resulted in a number of incurable neurological disorders such as tardive dyskinesia and Parkinson’s disease.

Thorazine and all the other knock-off drugs like Prolixin, Mellaril, Navane, etc., are synthetic “tricyclic” chemical compounds similar in molecular structure to the tricyclic “antidepressants” like imipramine and the similarly toxic, obesity-inducing, diabetogenic, “atypical” anti-schizophrenic drugs like Clozaril, Zyprexa and Seroquel.

Thorazine, incidentally, was originally developed in Europe as an industrial dye. That doesn’t sound so good although it may not be so unusual in the closely related fields of psychopharmcology and the chemical industry, especially when one considers that Depakote, a popular drug marketed initially as an anti-epilepsy drug but now is being heavily used as a so-called “mood stabilizer.” Depakote, known to be a hepatotoxin and renal toxin, was originally developed as an industrial solvent capable of dissolving fat -- including, presumably, the fatty tissue in human livers and brains.

Some sympathy and understanding needs to be generated for the various victims of BigPharma’s compulsive drive to expand market share and ”shareholder value” (share price, dividends and the next quarter’s financial report) by whatever means necessary. Both the prescribers and the swallowers of BigPharma’s drugs have succumbed to BigPharma’s cunning marketing campaigns, the prescribers having been seduced by attractive drug company representatives and their “pens, pizzas and post-it note” freebies in the office, and the patients being brain-washed by the inane and unbelievable (if one has intact critical thinking skills) commercials on TV that quickly gloss over the lethal adverse effects in the fine print while urging the watcher to “ask your doctor” about the latest unaffordable wannabe blockbuster drug. .

For a quick overview of these issues, I recommend that everybody with an open mind read a long essay written by Whitaker that persuasively identifies the source of America’s epidemic of mental illness disability (a phenomenon that doesn’t exist in Third World nations because costly psych drugs are not prescribed so cavalierly as in the US).

Whitaker and Jackson (among a number of other ground-breaking and whistle-blowing authors who have been essentially black-listed by the mainstream media and mainstream medical journals) have proven to most critically-thinking scientists, alternative practitioners and assorted “psychiatric survivors” that it is the drugs -- and not the so-called “disorders” -- that are causing our nation’s epidemic of mental illness disability. The Whitaker essay, plus other pertinent information about his books can be accessed at Mad In America. A recent interview on Wisconsin Public Radio can be accessed at www.wpr.org (at their radio archives link) and a long interview with Dr.Joseph Mercola can be heard here.

After reading and studying all these inconvenient truths, mental health practitioners must consider the medicolegal implications for them, especially if the information is ignored or if the information is dismissed out of hand by practitioners who might be tempted to not take the time to study this new information. Those people who are hearing about this for the first time need to pass the word on to others, especially their prescribing healthcare practitioners who should be equally concerned. This is important because the opinion leaders in the highly influential (for good or ill) psychiatric and medical industries have been marketed into submission without hearing the all the facts (which may have been intentionally hidden from them. If that is the case, they cannot be automatically blamed for. proceeding in a practice that some day might represent malpractice. It shouldn’t have to be pointed out that is the solemn duty of ethical practitioners who are in positions of authority to fully examine potential malpractice issues and then warn others, especially their patients, of the dangers.

Sadly, it must be admitted that most of the over-worked, double-booked care-givers in medical clinics have not yet heard the news that most if not all of the brain-altering synthetic chemicals known as psychotropic drugs (which are treated as hazardous waste unless they are packaged in a swallowable capsule!) have been marketed as safe and effective -- but only for short-term use. The captains of the drug industry know that the psychotropic drugs that they present for the FDA-approval have only been tested in animal trials for days and in clinical trials for 6 weeks. They also know -- indeed they hope -- that patients will be taking their drugs for years (despite no long-term trials proving safety and efficacy) as the only “treatment” for mental ill health. They know that their brain-altering drugs are also dependency-inducing (aka addicting, causing withdrawal symptoms when stopped), neurotoxic and increasingly ineffective (a la “Prozac Poop-out”) as time goes by.

The truth is that the people diagnosed as “mentally ill” for life are often simply those unfortunates who find themselves in acute or chronic states of crisis or “overwhelm” due to any number of preventable, curable and treatable (without the use of drugs) bad luck accidents such as poverty, abuse, violence, torture, homelessness, discrimination, underemployment, brain malnutrition, addictions/withdrawal, brain damage from electroshock “therapy” and/or exposure to neurotoxic chemicals in their food, air, water or prescription bottles.

Those labeled as the “mentally ill” are just like us “normals” who have not yet decompensated because of some yet-to-happen, crisis-inducing, overwhelming (however temporary) life situation. And thus we have not yet been given a billable code number (accompanied by the seemingly obligatory -- and unaffordable -- drug prescription or two signifying we are now chronically mentally ill. Unlabeled, we are likely to remain off prescription drugs but with a label and in “the system,” it is hard to “just say no to drugs.”

The victims of hopelessness-generating situations like simple bad luck, bad circumstances, bad company, bad choices, bad government, big business, and a competitive society that generates a few winners but mostly losers. America tolerates, indeed celebrates, punitive and thus fear-inducing social systems resembling in many ways the infamous police state realities of 20th century European totalitarianism, where people who were different or just dissidents were thought to be abnormal and therefore “disappeared” into insane asylums, jails or concentration camps without just cause or competent legal defense. And many of them were and are drugged with disabling psychoactive chemicals against their will.

The truth is that most, if not all, of BigPharma’s psychotropic drugs are lethal at some dosage level (the LD50, the lethal dose that kills 50 percent of lab animals, is calculated before efficacy testing is done), and therefore the drugs must be regarded as dangerous. The chronic use of these drugs is a major cause of cognitive disorders, brain damage, loss of creativity, loss of spirituality, loss of empathy, loss of energy, loss of strength, fatigue and tiredness, permanent disability and a multitude of metabolic adverse effects that can readily sicken the body, brain and soul by causing insomnia or somnolence, increased depression or anxiety, delusions, psychoses, paranoia, mania, etc. So before filling the prescription, it is advisable to read the product insert labeling under WARNINGS, PRECAUTIONS, ADVERSE EFFECTS, CONTRAINDICATIONS, TOXICOLOGY, OVERDOSAGE and the ever-present BLACK BOX WARNINGS ABOUT SUICIDALITY.

Long-term, high dosage or combination psychotropic drug usage could be regarded as a chemically traumatic brain injury (TBI) or, as drugs like Thorazine were known in the 1950s and 60s, a “chemical lobotomy.” That is a useful way to conceptualize this serious issue, because such chemically brain-altered patients are often indistinguishable from those who have suffered a physically traumatic brain injuries or been subjected to ice-pick lobotomies which were popular in the 1940s and 50s -- before the drugs came on the market.

America has a mental ill health epidemic on its hands that is grossly misunderstood because it is worsening, not by the supposed disease progression, but because of the neurotoxic, non-curative drugs that are somehow regarded as first-line “treatment.”

For more information of these extremely serious topics check out these websites: www.mindfreedom.org, www.breggin.com, www.icspp.org, www.cchr.org, www.drugawareness.org, www.psychrights.org, www.benzo.org.uk, www.quitpaxil, org, www.wildscolts.com, www.endofshock.com, www.mercola.com and www.madinamerica.com and follow the links.

Dr. Kohls is a family physician who, until his retirement in 2008, practiced holistic mental health care. His patients came to see him asking for help in getting off the psychotropic drugs that they knew were sickening and disabling them. He was successful in helping significant majorities of his patients get off their drugs using a thorough and therefore time-consuming program that was based on psychoeducational psychotherapy, brain nutrient therapy, a drastic change away from the malnourishing and often toxic Standard American Diet (SAD) plus a program of gradual, closely monitored drug withdrawal. Dr. Kohls warns against the abrupt discontinuation of any psychiatric drug because of the common, often serious withdrawal symptoms that can occur with the chronic use of any dependency-inducing psychoactive drug, whether illicit or legal. Close consultation with an aware, informed physician who is hopefully familiar with dealing with drug withdrawal syndromes (starting with the original prescribing physician), who will read and study the above books and become aware of the previously unknown dangers of these drugs and the nutritional needs of the drug-toxified and nutritionally-depleted brain.
Dr. Kohls is a member of MindFreedom International and the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology. He is the editor of the occasional Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter.


Vids on Fox News and ABC News about the futility and addiction of so called anti-depressants and pain killers.

http://wn.com/Dangers_Of_Antidepressants_Suppressed_Fox_News

More info about the ESEA prod

It is interesting, but it also tells that these scientists
were able to use water and salt and stabilitze some molecules
which have never been achieved before.

I read some of Emoto's theory about altering
the molecules of water, by using a vortex device.
Some have reported various sensations when trying doing
this clockwise, anti clockwise, and repeating the process altering
the direction.

The shady part here for me is the corporate style of marketing
this prod. Would it not be an irony if some of these men are fat
cats from Big Pharma? selling us snake oil, lol

watch this vid, very interesting:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smJKRKo5n6U&feature=related

Dr Jerry Tennant discusses
Body voltage, cells, pH balance and
tips concerning balancing body voltage,
hypthyroidism, adrenals,stomach acids, and more.

There were some contradictions, but overall
well worth watching!!

Part I vid:

http://www.globalpreneurs.com/playback.php?t=MzYzMjc1MjM2MjU2ODc5NjI4MzM0NA==

Part II vid:

http://www.globalpreneurs.com/playback.php?pl=YjRkMWQ2ZGQzODg5YzgzNWY1MGZlNWFjM2MyNTk4MDM2Mjg0MT&crmid=1&uid=6809

I am starting a new blog focusing on disease state and symptoms resulting from adverse reactions to medications/iatrogenic/toxicity/vaccines/environmental and other.

It will be accessible to co-authors, guest scientists worldwide,(anti-establishment) and contributing members only. We will co-ordinate and liaise information from various sources with the outcome to greater understanding how to /prevent/reverse/halt the Dis-Ease process regardless of its manifestation.

Meanwhile, this blog will continue to operate, on a smaller scale.

Regardless of the symptoms and manifestation of the ensuing illness/symptoms, the mechanism caused by oxidization of the endothelial cells will result in various disease state, no matter the affects.

Inflammation, will cause varied disease state in individuals. All systems are connected, regardless. The focus will be on mitochondria, methylation, oxidization, ROS (free radicals) metabolism, inflammation, and other cellular and biochemical processes and more.

Healing involves knowledge and intuition. There are forces and energies which are non formulaic.

Equally, there are healing compounds which works both in allopathic medicine (side effects will occur in most) and other healing practices which are not explained. Often, scientific formulas hinder healing process, burdened with academic conflicts and pharmaceutical interests at the forefront of allopathic medicine.

Will blog about empirical and theoretical, whilst discussing various healing approaches.

Science uses the hypothetico-deductive method. The hypothesis itself derived from non logical thinking, observable, intuitive thought pattern to which logic was applied using formulas. The scientific process has to be ampliative in order to evolve.