Broadcast Resources Available 24/7. Conscious Living, Learning, Teaching & Healing

Racketeering in Medi-Sin: The Suppression of Alternatives

A New Day of Truth Has Dawned

[osd_social_media_sharing]

253154_121136374700911_1722976310_n

Quotes We Were Not Taught In School

“Intensive research during the past twelve years on the relationship between diet and susceptibility to infection, not only in polio but also in common respiratory infections and tuberculosis, has convinced me that the human organism can protect itself against infection virtually completely by proper nutrition.”–Dr Sandler 1952

“The bottom line is that sugar upsets the body chemistry and suppresses the immune system.  Once the immune system becomes suppressed, the door is opened to infectious and degenerative diseases.  The stronger the immune system the easier it is for the body to fight infectious and degenerative diseases.”—Nancy Appleton, Ph.D.,

Vitamin A was named the “anti-infective vitamin” in 1928 by Edward Mellanby (1884-1955) and Harry N. Green, both doctors at the University of Sheffield.

“In 1949 Klenner described his successful treatment of polio…using ascorbic acid. The main value of his work is in showing that any viral disease can be successfully brought under control with ascorbic acid if the proper large doses are used…..Millions have been spent in unsuccessful attempts to find a nontoxic, effective virucide….while, harmless, inexpensive, and non-toxic ascorbic acid has been within easy reach.”—Dr. Irwin Stone

“We proposed that annual fluctuations in vitamin D levels explain the seasonality of influenza……..which cause recurrent and predictable wintertime vitamin D deficiency, predispose human populations to influenza epidemics. We raised the possibility that influenza is a symptom of vitamin D deficiency in the same way that an unusual form of pneumonia (pneumocystis carinii) is a symptom of AIDS. That is, we theorized that George Bernard Shaw was right when he said, “the characteristic microbe of a disease might be a symptom instead of a cause.”  Epidemic Influenza And Vitamin D By J. J. Cannell

“Could the increase in all forms of meningitis and other infectious disease complications and deaths be because for the last 40+ years, the first thing parents do at the slightest sign of temperature is push paracetamol?  I believe so.”–Hilary Butler (VRAN Newsletter Jan-March 2003)

Rife showed that by altering the environment and food supply, friendly bacteria such as colon bacillus could be converted into varied “pathogenic” bacteria. For example, Rife also observed that bacillus coli could in time be modified into the bacterial agent associated with typhus, and the process actually reversed. In Rife’s words:

In reality, it is not the bacteria themselves that produce the disease, but we believe it is . . . the unbalanced cell metabolism of the human body that in actuality produce the of disease. We also believe if the metabolism of the human body is perfectly balanced . . . it is susceptible to no disease.44

This observation closely parallels Alexis Carrel’s earlier research at the Rockefeller Institute where he was able to control the rates and levels of infectious disease mortality among mice. Beginning with the standard diet he observed a corresponding death rate of 52 percent. By making specific dietary improvements he was able to reduce mortality rates downward to 32 percent, then 14 percent, and finally to a rate of 0.45 “—-Dr. Raymond Obomsawin

Exerpt–When a therapy is widely accepted by the medical profession, no scientific proof of effectiveness is required, and anecdotal evidence is accepted as valid. If an alternative therapy is contested by those physicians, however, they attack by demanding that the therapy in question be subjected to very expensive and time-consuming double-blinded, placebo controlled trials costing tens of millions of dollars to meet FDA requirements. Medicare regulations also exclude the need for scientific proof for treatments that are utilized by a majority of physicians. The federal government thereby adds support to this double standard. Most people, including physicians, are not aware of the medical politics, legal machinations and economic sanctions that covertly control the practice of medicine in the United States. A physician who introduces an innovative and nontraditional type of therapy often becomes the target of those forces. That is especially true if a new therapy, like EDTA chelation: 1) involves a major shift in the scientific paradigm; 2) if acceptance of the new therapy somehow implies that currently used medical practices are inappropriate; or 3) if the new therapy threatens the financial well being of a politically powerful and well established branch of the medical profession. Quite the opposite occurred with the immediate and widespread acceptance of bypass surgery and balloon angioplasty, which quickly brought wealth and fame to surgeons, cardiologists, large teams of health care professionals, and the hospital industry. Inertia in science and medicine is a powerful force and is reinforced by major economic and legal forces in the United States. Many industries and special interest groups that are politically and economically powerful would be hurt financially if natural therpies were to become more widely accepted. Those same industries have a major influence in our society at all levels. Grants for university and medical school research often stem from those same sources. They spend heavily to lobby for laws, regulations and government funded medical research to favor their own interests and to suppress competition. It is difficult to obtain NIH research funds in the face of opposition from powerful lobbies when that research goes against those special interests. The welfare of the public is often pushed aside by the industrial quest for profits and pressures to suppress competition. Every industry wants a monopoly, if that can be achieved. Mainstream medicine has come very close to that goal. Scientific arrogance is commonplace. Physicians often consider themselves to be experts in their own field. If a majority of physicians do not endorse a new therapy, they collectively rely on public recognition of their own “expertise” to discount a new concept that they themselves have not yet embraced. They forget that all great advances in medicine began with a small minority. Their thinking tends to follow along these lines: “If I’m the expert and I don’t use this new therapy and if my many colleagues and peers are experts and they don’t believe in the new therapy, then we must be right and that small group of physicians who believe differently must be wrong. We’re the experts.” The most frequent criticism leveled by critics of non-traditional and alternative medical therapies is that new treatments are “unproven” because randomized, double-blind, controlled studies have not yet been done to prove effectiveness. Those criticisms ignore the fact that most medical procedures routinely performed in the practice of medicine are also unproven using those same criteria. When a therapy is widely accepted by the medical profession, no scientific proof of effectiveness is required, and anecdotal evidence is accepted as valid. If an alternative therapy is contested by those physicians, however, they attack by demanding that the therapy in question be subjected to very expensive and time-consuming double-blinded, placebo controlled trials costing tens of millions of dollars to meet FDA requirements. Medicare regulations also exclude the need for scientific proof for treatments that are utilized by a majority of physicians. The federal government thereby adds support to this double standard. Racketeering in Medicine: The Suppression of Alternatives

High Dose Vitamin C Cures Swine Flu And Gets Suppressed! Dr. Thomas Levy MD