+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30

Thread: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

  1. Link to Post #1
    Avalon Member dynamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th March 2013
    Location
    Cosmic Messenger
    Posts
    624
    Thanks
    4,865
    Thanked 4,860 times in 593 posts

    Default How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    (good read for those not familiar with the history of the pharmaceutical age...dynamo)

    https://upliftconnect.com/was-natura...troyed-in-1910

    The Move that Changed the Health and Wellbeing Industry

    I am now 68 and over the years I have relied upon alternative medical solutions for almost all my health problems. A change in diet, herbs, vitamins, minerals and lots of exercise ended up being almost all the medicine I ever needed!

    In 2010, when I was 61, I cured myself of arthritis with vitamins and minerals alone. I had suffered since I was in my 20s. My doctors said arthritis was not curable, but Western medicine was wrong about arthritis.

    After that simple cure, I quit suffering, became skeptical, and started to research the history of medicine in North America. What I discovered is astonishing!



    From a young age, I was fascinated by medical technology. When I was about 7 years old, in 1956, a very old lady next door was using an antique electric muscle stimulation tool on her leg muscles, which were stiff. She said it made her feel better.

    I was fascinated as a child to see her leg muscles pulsing from the electric field. When I asked our family doctor what that electric stimulation tool was about, he told me it was all ‘quack medicine’ that did nothing at all.

    In 1963, I was 14 years old. My parents went on holidays in Barbados and left me with a Latvian couple who had a farm outside Hamilton, Ontario. They grew many mysterious plants called ‘medicinal herbs’ on their farm for healing. When they told me about herbalism in Latvia, I was astounded to know that medicines came from herbs.

    My parents knew nothing about herbs as medicine. In all my schooling up to that point, ‘herbs for medicine’ was a topic that never came up. When I researched it at the local library, I found that herbs had been used as medicine for thousands of years. How did the history of herbal medicine become virtually erased by the mid 20th century?

    The Unknown History of Alternate Therapies

    As an inventor, at age 65, I designed electro-medicine brain stimulation devices for brightening mood and for relaxation.

    I was surprised to learn that similar machines were first used in France, in 1903. And I was astounded to learn that electro-medicine was first used in ancient Egypt, where electric eels were used to treat migraine headaches.

    In ancient Rome, electric fish were used to treat epilepsy and headaches. Electro-medicine remained popular worldwide throughout the 20th century, except in North America, where it was almost unknown until the late 1980s. How did the use of electro-medical treatment become virtually erased from our culture in North America?

    The Origins of Western Medicine

    The creation of Western medicine starts with John D. Rockefeller (1839 – 1937) who was an oil baron and America’s first billionaire. In the 1800s, using ‘organic chemistry,’ or the chemistry of carbon, the petrochemical industries were created. In the 1800s, it came to light that various traditional herbal remedies contained active ingredients called ‘alkaloids.’

    These alkaloids could often be produced synthetically by the petrochemical industries. Sometimes the active ingredient of a medicinal herb could be chemically modified and patented. This new business was called the ‘pharmaceutical industry.’ The resulting patent medicine could be sold at great profit, compared to the herb from which it was originally derived.

    By the turn on the 20th century, Rockefeller controlled 90% of all oil production in the U.S. through a multitude of oil companies owned by him. There were only 1,000 cars in existence in 1900 that burned gasoline. Not much profit was to be found in cars. The petrochemical industry, however, was flourishing.

    The pharmaceutical industries promised to be the most profitable part of the oil industry. Rockefeller invested heavily in the newly created pharmaceutical companies. He formed the Rockefeller Foundation in 1913 and focused on the pharmaceutical industries and medical education.

    See this YouTube video of the history of the AMA and Carnegie Institute here:



    Andrew Carnegie, in 1900, was also very wealthy. He had made his original fortune by investing in Columbia Oil in 1862; made an even bigger fortune in steel and formed the Carnegie Foundation in 1905. The foundation was known for its expertise in funding, and carrying out, educational ventures.

    The Flexner Report

    In the early 1900s, the newly formed American Medical Association, or AMA, realized that medical education was in a sad state of chaos, so they created The Council on Medical Education in 1904, to study the need for educational improvements.

    However, the AMA could not afford to do the study. Henry Pritchett of the Carnegie Foundation offered both money and recruited Abraham Flexner to do the study.

    The Carnegie Foundation then took over the management of The Council on Medical Education and invested millions of dollars in the project. They studied every medical school in North America, issuing a report in 1910 called the the Flexner Report. To be fair, the Flexner Report did at least help to standardize medical practices. But it had many negative effects too.

    The study was funded by the Carnegie Foundation with donations from John D. Rockefeller and other industrialists. By 1909, The Council on Medical Education was being run by the industrialists, who were heavily invested in the pharmaceutical industries, a branch of the petrochemical industries.

    These industries were in direct competition with traditional healing approaches, such as herbalism, electro-medicine, naturopathy, massage, diet, exercise, etc.

    The effects on other branches of healing that the report had is well summarized by the Wikipedia entry on the Flexner Report:

    "Medical schools that offered training in various disciplines including electromagnetic field therapy, phototherapy, eclectic medicine, physio medicalism, naturopathy, and homeopathy, were told either to drop these courses from their curriculum or lose their accreditation and underwriting support. A few schools resisted for a time, but eventually all either complied with the report or shut their doors."

    The Flexner Report also marked the beginning of the end for midwifery in the USA and Canada. After 1910, state after state in the USA and province after province in Canada outlawed midwifery.

    By 1929, the Carnegie Institute was given the accreditation authority for medical schools in both Canada and the USA. All medical schools that were not in agreement with the Flexner Report were closed.

    After 1935, medical schools only offered pharmacological approaches, vaccines and surgery. All other traditional healing approaches were successfully eliminated from medical education.

    It was also an ‘Old White Boys Club’ and both African-Americans and women were driven out of medical practice after the release of the report. This was unfortunate for women and African-Americans because before 1910, there were many practicing African-American and women MDs.

    By 1950, our North American medical culture had been purged of all traditional approaches to healthcare. Only the pharmaceutical industry approaches, plus vaccines and surgery, remained.

    As the older doctors retired, herbalism, naturopathy, electro-medicine, massage, and other alternative therapies, were all but forgotten. They were classified as ‘quack medicine,’ a term which was popularized after the Flexner Report. Rockefeller medicine became mainstream medicine.

    Traditional Healing Approaches Re-Emerge in the 1960s

    By the time I was 17 years old, I was part of the hippie subculture and herbs, vitamins, minerals, acupuncture, marijuana, and massage were cool suddenly. We contributed to the reformation of the Canadian medical scene. Within less than 10 years, herbs, minerals and vitamins were everywhere.

    Health food stores blossomed. Herbs were shown by scientific studies to actually work in the 1970s, through to the present. Various heroes of the scientific world have protected our freedom, as well as those like Linus Pauling for his support for vitamin C.

    Fortunately, times are changing and medical doctors are listening to their patient’s requests for natural health care. Today, many physicians collaborate with naturopaths and chiropractors.

    My own open-minded family physician does not push me to take prescription medicine. It is encouraging to see MDs, such as Andrew Weil, working to promote a more balanced model for healthcare that is inclusive of all options, at the University level.

    Physicians cannot be blamed for their 20th century pharmacological slant on healthcare issues. Their educational systems were compromised by the industrial interests of those who funded the Flexner Report of 1910.

    Protecting Access to Herbs and Supplements

    In Canada and the USA, during my lifetime, there have been several attempts to establish expensive and overly rigorous standards for herbs and supplements that are relatively safe, compared to pharmaceuticals. This threatens herbalists and other producers of alternative medicines.

    It threatens the availability of these health aids. One can only assume that these efforts were driven by lobbyists from the pharmacological industries. Citizens groups in the USA and Canada strongly opposed the proposed new legislations and we successfully defeated them through petitions addressed to our Members of Parliament in Canada or Congressmen in the USA. There is a need for continuing vigilance on the part of citizens.

    We Need to Develop a Grassroots, Double-Blind Testing System

    Pharmaceuticals receive extensive testing for medical verification. Important herbs, such as turmeric or minerals like boron, rarely receive any testing because there is no profit in it. However, there would be great rewards for current and future generations if the testing of herbs and supplements was carried out.

    It could be done with modern technology by creating a grassroots, double-blind testing site, where data could come in from people who decided to become their own ‘guinea pig.’ Samples and placebos could be sent by mail with ID numbers. It can be done! Who wants to propose a computer website solution?

    A Balanced Approach is Needed

    Pharmacological drugs for treatment of illness have their place for treating certain conditions. Antibiotics revolutionized health care. Anaesthetics made surgery painless.

    Alternative health approaches have merit and dietary approaches can sometimes even cure the disease, preventing the need for treatment! These alternatives need to co-exist with pharmacological medicines as options that healers can recommend.

    Author: Ian Faulkner
    Sources: ElephantJournal.com; UpliftConnect.com
    Image: Wikicommons
    Last edited by Bill Ryan; 13th December 2018 at 19:28. Reason: added source link

  2. The Following 52 Users Say Thank You to dynamo For This Post:

    A Voice from the Mountains (25th October 2018), Arn (13th December 2018), avid (16th December 2017), Baby Steps (16th December 2017), Bill Ryan (16th December 2017), Blacklight43 (16th December 2017), BMJ (21st December 2017), Bob (16th December 2017), Bubu (4th December 2018), Chris Gilbert (16th December 2017), conk (27th December 2017), Constance (24th May 2019), DeeMetrios (17th December 2017), drneglector (25th October 2018), enigma3 (16th December 2017), Ewan (16th December 2017), findingneo (17th December 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th December 2017), Franny (7th February 2018), gigha (17th December 2017), guyres (16th December 2017), Hervé (16th December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), Ioneo (17th December 2017), Jac0b (18th December 2017), Jayke (16th December 2017), jjjones (17th December 2017), Kryztian (16th December 2017), leavesoftrees (17th December 2017), Lefty Dave (17th December 2017), lilac (14th November 2018), lisalu (6th February 2018), meeradas (3rd December 2018), Mike (16th December 2017), mpennery (17th December 2017), Nasu (18th December 2017), Omni (16th December 2017), onevoice (15th November 2018), Rahkyt (23rd May 2019), Red Skywalker (16th December 2017), Richard S. (17th December 2017), Satori (25th October 2018), shaberon (16th December 2017), Sophocles (14th November 2018), StandingWave (16th December 2017), Star Tsar (18th December 2017), toppy (17th December 2017), Tree Of Life (3rd December 2018), TrumanCash (18th December 2017), Unicorn (14th November 2018), viking (17th December 2017), XelNaga (3rd December 2018)

  3. Link to Post #2
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    1st April 2016
    Posts
    1,509
    Thanks
    2,099
    Thanked 4,861 times in 1,279 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Yes, pretty good dig there.

    Could possibly add that that same clique of Ivy League doctors created modern Eugenics, leading to things like sterilization and import quotas in the U. S., and inspired other countries like Sweden and Germany to follow suit.

    And noting from 1,000 cars around 1900...petroleum is mostly used for plastic and chemicals. Civilian gasoline is a relatively tiny morsel, almost a red herring. American Cancer Society is next to an outright fraud run by these loons.

    I can't say that allopathic medicine is entirely useless, although, I'd rather see it as a last resort, than this massive, dominating beast.

  4. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to shaberon For This Post:

    BMJ (21st December 2017), dynamo (16th December 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), Michelle Marie (21st December 2017), toppy (17th December 2017), Tree Of Life (3rd December 2018)

  5. Link to Post #3
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd June 2013
    Location
    North America
    Age
    67
    Posts
    6,884
    Thanks
    12,723
    Thanked 29,293 times in 6,140 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Thanks Dynamo - I don't see your age, but I assume after the first line, the rest of the dialog is written by

    Quote Author: Ian Faulkner
    Sources: ElephantJournal.com; UpliftConnect.com
    What have you explored or agree or disagree with Alternate Medicine and/or allopathic?

    I certainly am concerned about the lobbyist strong-arm position from major pharmaceuticals and most certainly find many toxicities of "Patent" (highly refined patented un-natural drugs, either synthesized from chemicals (it doesn't have to be petroleum as the source) or extracted from plants, i.e. opiodes)...

    Opium extracts, especially codeine, tinctures of opium, heroin were regularly prescribed by the "unregulated" doctors in the late 1800's thru early 1900's.. Opium doesn't come from petroleum.

    Cocaine, highly extracted refined extract from cocoa leaf.. Also something widely prescribed then controlled..

    The proper use of control comes from when something is abused, and the person using it "cannot control" themselves..

    Ethanol a byproduct of yeast fermentation, a highly "natural" product (i.e. beer or wine) also used within preparations by early physicians from the 1800's through the 1950's.. And again a potential for abuse where the person using it "cannot control" themselves.

    Original tobacco - fine in small amounts, but highly refined, chemicals added, plants grown to have more nicotine... and it becomes a "controlled substance".. I recall my first nicotine overdose from having tried "viceroys" back in the late 1950s... (Switched to clean pipe tobacco in the 60's then finally stopped by 1980)...

    Rockefeller went after the problem of children dying.. What profiteering which may have happened afterwards, may not be an accurate rendition of history, but a flavored/colored/adulterated presentation of those resentful of one more financially powerful (and ruthless) than him.

    Quote After John D. Rockefeller Sr.'s grandson died from scarlet fever in January 1901, the capitalist and philanthropist formalized plans to establish the research center he had been discussing for three years with his adviser Frederick T. Gates and his son John D. Some of the first projects were to solve bacterial contamination in New York City’s milk supply. Afterwards, those within the Rockefeller institute developed an anti-meningitis serum; Hideyo Noguchi studied the syphilis microbe and searched for the cause of yellow fever; Louise Pearce developed a drug to use against African sleeping sickness; and Peyton Rous deduced that cancer can be caused by a virus.
    There was no "oil petrochemical" mindset but caring doctors focused on solving at the causal level major diseases harming young and old alike.

    This is a quote that is seldom seen,

    Quote The Rockefeller Institute Hospital, crucial to the institute’s mission, opened in 1910. The first center for clinical research in the United States, it remains a place where researchers can link laboratory investigations with bedside observations to provide a scientific basis for disease detection, prevention and treatment. Early on, researchers at the hospital studied polio, heart disease and diabetes, among other diseases. This special hospital environment served as the model for dozens of other clinical research centers established in the next decades.

    Landmark Science
    In 1913, Oswald T. Avery came to The Rockefeller Institute Hospital to study differences in virulence among strains of pneumococcus, a bacterium that causes severe pneumonia. Dr. Avery’s research led to the development of the first vaccine for pneumococcal pneumonia, but it also led him and colleagues Colin M. MacLeod and Maclyn McCarty to make an unexpected discovery in 1944: that DNA is the substance that transmits hereditary information, a finding that would set the course for biological research for the rest of the century.

    Other Rockefeller researchers modernized the science of cell biology in the 1940s and 50s. Making use of the newly developed electron microscope, which provided magnification hundreds of thousands of times that of traditional light microscopes, Rockefeller scientists were the first to see inside cells. They demonstrated that the fluid inside cells, which once had been considered an undifferentiated chemical soup, contain unique structures that carry out distinct functions that cells need to live. Together, these scientists ushered the science of cell biology into the modern era.
    --Bob

  6. Link to Post #4
    Avalon Member Kryztian's Avatar
    Join Date
    16th September 2012
    Location
    New Jersey USA
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,311
    Thanks
    7,631
    Thanked 8,765 times in 1,259 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Another good report on the Rockefeller's domination of the American health industry for the sake of making corporations rich and keeping Americans sick and poor.

    https://www.corbettreport.com/episod...ller-medicine/


  7. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Kryztian For This Post:

    BMJ (21st December 2017), Bubu (4th December 2018), dynamo (16th December 2017), enigma3 (16th December 2017), Hervé (16th December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), Michelle Marie (21st December 2017), Nasu (18th December 2017), toppy (17th December 2017), Tree Of Life (3rd December 2018)

  8. Link to Post #5
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd June 2013
    Location
    North America
    Age
    67
    Posts
    6,884
    Thanks
    12,723
    Thanked 29,293 times in 6,140 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    A couple references on the Tobacco modification programs and advertising campaigns.. where regulatory bodies found out how some dangerous practices were happpening

    Quote The Viceroy brand was involved in public controversy beginning in 1994 when U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner David Aaron Kessler revealed that B&W had been found growing genetically modified tobacco plants in South America, the plants engineered to produce increased levels of nicotine.

    Viceroy King Size and Viceroy Lights King Size cigarettes made in 1993 were identified as some of the B&W brands carrying "approximately 10% of this genetically bred high-nicotine tobacco called Y-1," referring to Y1 tobacco.
    Quote In the 1970s, Viceroy was proposed as part of a B&W marketing test to see whether children could be encouraged to become smokers. This was discovered by the Federal Trade Commission during a closed investigation of cigarette company advertising practices. The Viceroy ad campaign was not carried out.
    Quote [..] Scandal - in 1995 when former B&W vice president Jeffrey Wigand, a research chemist, revealed that B&W had been adding chemicals to the B&W cigarette brands Kool, Capri and Viceroy to increase smokers' addiction to nicotine.
    Alcohol, opium, heroin, cocaine were all known to be highly addictive and not able to be "self regulated" to moderate "addiction" or organ failure/death from respiratory failure for instance.. But such was pushed by unregulated 'doctors' and then industry and then "blackmarkets" for profiteering.

    As to natural herbal damage - Chaparral liver damage liver and kidney damage.. Certain Organic mushrooms, combined with alcohol, dangerous conditions result - how can an uneducated, untrained lay person know? Who is reputable to train them? When combined with alcohol, this reportedly poisonous mushroom may become even more toxic. At least three cases of intoxication have been reported when combining the scaly Pholiota with alcohol, with symptoms including diarrhea, vomiting, and shock.

    Salicylic acid from the white willow tree bark is a major "natural" non-petroleum based analgesic and thermal (fever) reducer.. Combined with a methyl molecule it becomes "oil of wintergreen". Methanol, derived from distilling wood.. Methanol CAN be derived from petroleum, which then "methanol" becomes the primary base building block which other substances (highly patented, read profitable, "medicines").. So METHANOL can be derived organically from plants, then manipulated.. OR methanol can be derived from PETROLEUM.. It doesn't mater chemically or functionally, just that the methyl molecule is used highly in making many many substances.

    It seems then, interests took organics, and looked for lower cost sources of organic starting point materials.. Plant organics never-the-less are the starting point.. Petroleum oil came from plants originally, just very old very compressed and cooked plant organic material..

    The HERBAL organics come from plants that haven't been "pressure cooked" deep in the earth (not yet became petroleum).. No difference really then, organics as a starting point ARE still are ORGANICS...

    It is all still organic.. when the extracts are highly refined and manipulated, "out of balanced", without nature's synergy, massive difficulties can happen as a "system" re-adjusts...

    That system can be a personal biological system, or it could be whole ecosystem.. How can a narrow visioned "man" visualize the impacts of radical manipulative change? Where is the fore-sight?

    There is "expediency" (narrow minded, high immediate profit motive) and there is extreme long range planning that can happen to affect positive benefit globally over generations..

    I think the path one chooses comes from either being narrow minded egocentric or planetarily oriented group long term mindset oriented. Or one does nothing and vegitates, or armchair pokes at those who have succeeded one way or another in creating change. I guess one who can't focus on the long term, who can't determine a vision past their own life just arm-chair pokes.. Maybe that is a personal bias.. I've lately seen many viewpoints, many which work and many which keep one in agony spinning and complaining..
    Last edited by Bob; 17th December 2017 at 12:55.

  9. Link to Post #6
    Avalon Member dynamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th March 2013
    Location
    Cosmic Messenger
    Posts
    624
    Thanks
    4,865
    Thanked 4,860 times in 593 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Quote Posted by Bob (here)
    Thanks Dynamo - I don't see your age, but I assume after the first line, the rest of the dialog is written by

    Quote Author: Ian Faulkner
    Sources: ElephantJournal.com; UpliftConnect.com
    What have you explored or agree or disagree with Alternate Medicine and/or allopathic?
    ..
    Bob, I am 57 years young and although I did not write the OP, I certainly can relate to the author's childhood and later life experiences and interest in natural healing.
    It would take me a day to write about my own experiments with various treatments and another day to write what I agree/disagree on.
    Perhaps another time, too much on my plate right now, just thought this post would be a good eye opener for some of the Members here.

  10. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to dynamo For This Post:

    BMJ (21st December 2017), Bob (16th December 2017), Ewan (17th December 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), Jac0b (18th December 2017), Michelle Marie (21st December 2017), Nasu (18th December 2017), Omni (17th December 2017), toppy (17th December 2017)

  11. Link to Post #7
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd June 2013
    Location
    North America
    Age
    67
    Posts
    6,884
    Thanks
    12,723
    Thanked 29,293 times in 6,140 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Thanks Dynamo - I love what you've brought forth ) Most kindly..

  12. Link to Post #8
    Avalon Member Omni's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st February 2011
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    3,814
    Thanks
    12,541
    Thanked 22,299 times in 3,448 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Excellent article, thanks.

  13. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Omni For This Post:

    BMJ (21st December 2017), dynamo (16th December 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), Michelle Marie (21st December 2017), toppy (17th December 2017)

  14. Link to Post #9
    Avalon Member Omni's Avatar
    Join Date
    1st February 2011
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    3,814
    Thanks
    12,541
    Thanked 22,299 times in 3,448 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    I disagree with all pharmaceuticals. Natural remedies and end game frequency science are far superior.
    Last edited by Omni; 17th December 2017 at 06:53. Reason: added bit

  15. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Omni For This Post:

    BMJ (21st December 2017), conk (25th October 2018), dynamo (17th December 2017), East Sun (17th December 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th December 2017), Franny (7th February 2018), Hym (7th February 2018), Jac0b (18th December 2017), Michelle Marie (21st December 2017), Nasu (18th December 2017), toppy (17th December 2017), Valerie Villars (7th February 2018)

  16. Link to Post #10
    Wales Avalon Member
    Join Date
    8th October 2012
    Location
    Wales, UK
    Age
    51
    Posts
    452
    Thanks
    2,145
    Thanked 2,233 times in 415 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    I'd be interested to find out what combinations of vitamins the author used to cure his arthritis.

    There is sometimes an assumption that because something is mainstream or efficiently mass produced it must be bad. When I had a stomach ulcer back in '96 it was modern drugs that cleared it up completely and the symptoms have never returned since. I'd still be interested however to find out if alternative approaches such as plant extracts, modifications to diet and lifestyle could also have been equally effective.

  17. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to happyuk For This Post:

    BMJ (21st December 2017), Bob (17th December 2017), dynamo (17th December 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), Michelle Marie (21st December 2017), Nasu (18th December 2017)

  18. Link to Post #11
    Australia Avalon Member
    Join Date
    23rd June 2011
    Age
    39
    Posts
    994
    Thanks
    237
    Thanked 3,415 times in 772 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    i haven't go thought the article and considering look into this but from the title i always had that thought. i have heard alot using natural remedy cure before awakening sickness especially right now and always have that thought why doctors prescribe medicine instead of prescribe natural medicine...University should have classes or research on natural medicine.

  19. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to apokalypse For This Post:

    BMJ (21st December 2017), dynamo (17th December 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), Michelle Marie (21st December 2017)

  20. Link to Post #12
    Germany Avalon Member
    Join Date
    31st May 2010
    Location
    SW Germany
    Age
    64
    Posts
    1,718
    Thanks
    2,304
    Thanked 8,682 times in 1,615 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    there's a cure for everything out there including cancer (research the findings of Royal Raymond Rife let alone doctors around 1900 who were using enzymes back then to cure cancer); cancer in earler times was almost un-heard of (anything that could not be diagnosed in earlier times was labled as 'cancer') as well as cardio-vascular disease before ca. 1930;

    what are we doing wrong?

    in earlier times people were frying exclusively with lard/butter but they remained slim and didn't get cancer or cardio-vascular disease (let alone high cholesterol levels- weren't being monitored/known back then as if they have any validity/then, know a days- thanks Big Pharma!)-

    as for tobacco/opium use: supposedly both agents (without additives) contain many beneficial agents (let alone the positive agents of the hemp plant; like start with "medical marijuana")-

    we're constantly being told what is 'bad' for us is actually good for us and what is 'bad' for us is actually good-

    and we're not living in a world of deception?

    Larry

  21. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Cardillac For This Post:

    BMJ (21st December 2017), Bubu (4th December 2018), dynamo (17th December 2017), Foxie Loxie (17th December 2017), happyuk (19th December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), Michelle Marie (21st December 2017)

  22. Link to Post #13
    United States Avalon Member Michelle Marie's Avatar
    Join Date
    5th June 2011
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,630
    Thanks
    27,304
    Thanked 16,971 times in 2,584 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Quote Posted by Omnisense (here)
    I disagree with all pharmaceuticals. Natural remedies and end game frequency science are far superior.
    I agree. I also had severe arthritis about 20 years ago. Rejected the doctor's prognosis and medicine, went to a health food store and got vitamins, changed my diet (candida diet), got acupuncture...and voila! Cured.

    I quit all doctors and medicine. My strong intuition guided me away from medicine completely. The last thing I ever took was thyroid medicine. I've spoken to many people who say the only medicine they take is thyroid medicine.

    JUST TODAY!! I read in the Arrigo files that the plan is to cause hypothyroidism and make people dependent on that medicine. I'll add that link here...its in the Avalon library.

    Here it is...go to the top of page 9
    http://avalonlibrary.net/Sue_Arrigo/...0the%20USA.pdf

    I learned the 5 rites exercises and use iodine or kelp sprinkles. A few simple yoga asanas and stretching. I walk or bike ride, too.

    I use garlic and Vit. C. Also grapefruit seed extract oil. Turmeric. Knox gelatin was an inexpensive alternative to shark cartilage. Baking soda. Visualization. Affirmations. Intention. Meditation. All these things work for me. & Avoid stress. Mostly, avoid doctors. No GMO food! Mostly organic.

    Miso soup to remove heavy metals.

    To me, doctors are dangerous and they track you too. My intuition is strong; my intentions have power. I'm going to live until I die, or move on from this experience to the next because I know I am eternal.

    I'm using mind power and conscious personal programming. The more I learn about the eugenics and the current global haulocost, the more determined I am to stay in control of my own health.

    I'm currently learning more about frequencies and methods to reprogram the subconscious mind.

    MM

    Oh yeah, thanks Larry, and medical marijuana. Cooked in coconut oil.
    Last edited by Michelle Marie; 21st December 2017 at 05:52.
    ~*~ "The best way to predict the future is to create it." - Peter Drucker ~*~ “To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children...to leave the world a better place...to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson ~*~ "Creative minds always have been known to survive any kind of bad training." - Anna Freud ~*~

  23. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Michelle Marie For This Post:

    Blacklight43 (21st December 2017), BMJ (21st December 2017), Bubu (4th December 2018), Charles Harris (25th October 2018), Foxie Loxie (21st December 2017), Hym (7th February 2018), lisalu (7th February 2018), Tree Of Life (3rd December 2018), Unicorn (14th November 2018)

  24. Link to Post #14
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,151
    Thanks
    27,086
    Thanked 47,715 times in 9,723 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Modern Medicine Is the Third Leading Cause of Death
    (This subject may need its' own thread, if there isn't one already)
    Can the Conventional Medical Profession Be Trusted?
    February 06, 2018
    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a..._rid=206284650

    Quote Story at-a-glance
    Trust in the medical profession has dramatically declined in recent decades. In 1966, more than 75 percent of Americans had great confidence in medical professionals; today only 34 percent do
    Only 25 percent have confidence in the U.S. health system and a mere 14 percent trust the federal government will do what’s right most of the time
    A glaring example of how little attention our medical system affords health is the fact that U.S. hospitals and senior care institutions still insist on serving highly processed, sugary foods and meal replacement beverages
    Research by John Ioannidis, one of the world's foremost experts on the credibility of medical research, shows as much as 90 percent of the published medical information relied on by doctors is flawed or incorrect
    Research published in 2016 concluded that medical errors are the third leading cause of death in the U.S., killing an estimated 250,000 Americans each year
    By Dr. Mercola

    According to a recent article in The New York Times, growing distrust in the medical profession poses a threat to public health and safety.1 “Trust is crucial in the relationship between patients and health care providers, but it's been on the decline in recent decades,” Dr. Dhruv Khullar, a physician at New York Presbyterian Hospital and a researcher at Weill Cornell Department of Healthcare Policy and Research writes, noting that:

    “Mistrust in the medical profession — particularly during emergencies like epidemics — can have deadly consequences. In 1966, more than three-fourths of Americans had great confidence in medical leaders; today, only 34 percent do.

    Compared with people in other developed countries, Americans are considerably less likely to trust doctors, and only a quarter express confidence in the health system. During some recent disease outbreaks, less than one-third of Americans said they trusted public health officials to share complete and accurate information. Only 14 percent trust the federal government to do what’s right most of the time.”

    Trust Requires Trustworthiness
    Trust in the conventional medical paradigm has declined for a good reason. As noted by Khullar, “Waning trust in the health system is partly a result of the sometimes well-founded public perception that its key players pursue profits at the expense of patients.” Indeed, how is anyone expected to trust a system as riddled with corporate profit bias as what we currently have?

    Doctors, while well-intentioned, have by and large become untrustworthy for the simple fact that they stopped thinking for themselves and fell into a corporate for-profit scheme that depends on chronic illness. Few are those who buck the system, do their own research rather than getting their information from pharmaceutical reps, and focus on patient education about preventive strategies that don’t involve costly drugs or surgical interventions.

    A healthy whole food diet, exercise, proper breathing and movement, sensible sun exposure and grounding — these are all simple foundational aspects of good health that cost very little or nothing. Yet they’re rarely if ever considered when it comes time to address illness. The article also rightfully notes that transparency is a key feature that inspires trust, and honest transparency has become increasingly difficult to come by.

    As just one example, the list of medical professionals, nutritional professionals and academics who pose as independent experts sharing their well-educated stances with the public — when in fact they are paid shills for one corporation or another — has grown longer with each passing year. Hiding conflicts of interest has become the norm, it seems, and honest disclosure of possible conflicts of interest is a cornerstone of the kind of transparency needed to build trust.

    Following are a few blaring examples showcasing why distrust in the medical system is actually warranted, and could be viewed as a sign of sanity prevailing over orchestrated attempts to undermine public health and well-being.

    CDC and Coca-Cola — Still ‘Partners in Health’
    In 2015, it was revealed that a Coca-Cola front group called the Global Energy Balance Network (GEBN) was founded to cast doubts on claims that soda consumption is a major if not primary cause of obesity, Type 2 diabetes and related health problems. The network, funded with millions from Coca-Cola that were never publicly disclosed, pushed the already debunked theory that to maintain a healthy weight, all you need is more exercise.

    After that public relations nightmare, Coca-Cola vowed to be more transparent about its funding of scientists and health partnerships, but as noted in a recent report by Russ Greene,2 the company has not changed its ways.

    While Coca-Cola claims to publish “all relevant funding of well-being related research, partnerships and health professionals and scientific experts” every six months, when comparing the company’s data with annual reports from the U.S. Centers for Disease Prevention (CDC) and the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH), Greene discovered major discrepancies.

    As it turns out, Coca-Cola failed to report some of its largest payments to the CDC. “Coca-Cola donated to the [CDC’s] Foundation in 2013, 2015, 2016 and 2017, according to the Foundation’s annual fiscal reports. And yet a search for ‘Centers for Disease Control’ in Coca-Cola’s website yields no results since 2012,” Greene writes.

    He also notes that these payments seem to be at odds with statements made by former CDC director Dr. Tom Frieden, who last year stated he’d been “winding down Coke-funded programs” during his tenure, and had “basically canceled” the CDC’s Coca-Cola run anti-obesity campaign, saying he couldn’t justify having “Coca-Cola run an obesity campaign that had an exclusive focus on physical activity.”

    Conflict of Interest Policy Forbids CDC Foundation From Partnering With Soda Giant
    Frieden also claimed he’d encouraged the company to provide nonexercise-related donations, but that nothing had come of it, with the exception of a $20,000 donation for a program linked to fighting the Ebola virus. “Frieden’s claims … are not consistent with the fact that Coca-Cola donated to the CDC Foundation during every single year of his tenure except 2014,” Greene writes, “And Coca-Cola’s ‘transparency’ archive is hiding at least four separate payments to the CDC Foundation. So, both parties are acting as if they’re ashamed of their partnership. And yet it persists.”

    Perhaps most importantly, the CDC Foundation’s acceptance of funding from Coca-Cola is at odds with its own conflict of interest policy, which does not permit “Partnership with an organization that represents any product that exacerbates morbidity or mortality when used as directed (mission compatibility).” Anyone who has read even a fraction of the research on sugar and sweetened beverages in recent years would agree that Coca-Cola does not qualify as a CDC “mission compatible” health partner.

    Coca-Cola Still Hides NIH Payments
    Coca-Cola has also neglected to report payments to the FNIH, Greene found. Since the FNIH is a nongovernmental entity, it is not subject to the same policies and regulations as the NIH itself. This, as noted on the FNIH’s website, allows the foundation “to have a unique role” in public and private partnerships. As noted by Greene:3

    “The NIH Foundation is essentially a money launderer. It provides corporations that are banned by NIH’s conflict of interest policy from donating directly to NIH with a convenient loophole. For example, Coca-Cola can’t pay the NIH directly, but it can pay the NIH Foundation, which then transfers the money to the NIH … Coca-Cola is listed twice as a donor to the NIH Foundation in 2015. But Coca-Cola’s archives do not list an NIH Foundation payment that year …

    [A]t this point, is there any reason to believe that we’ve been allowed to see the full extent of the Coca-Cola partnerships with CDC and NIH? Consider that we have corrected Coca-Cola’s archives multiple times in the past, and they updated their records shortly thereafter.”

    Hospitals Serve Sugar-Laden Processed Foods
    Another glaring example of how little attention our medical system affords health is the fact that U.S. hospitals and senior care institutions still insist on serving highly processed, sugary foods and “nutritional shakes” like Ensure and Boost.4,5 Fruit juices are another unhealthy staple. Even diabetics are served ample amounts of bread and other refined carbs that will ensure they’ll never be able to keep their blood sugar under control.6

    Sugar, especially high fructose corn syrup, is the very last thing a sick person needs while trying to recuperate and recover, and if there ever was a place where healthy eating should be the norm, it would be in our hospitals. Yet hospital meals are chockful of sugars, chemicals and genetically engineered ingredients that do your body no good.

    Take Ensure, for example. Of its 36 itemized ingredients, the first six are corn syrup, corn maltodextrin, sugar (sucrose), corn oil, sodium and calcium caseinates, soy protein isolate and artificial flavor.

    This horrendous concoction is typically given as complete meal replacements to people who cannot chew or swallow and need to use a feeding tube. At present, there appears to be just one organic, whole food-based feeding tube formula on the market. It’s called Liquid Hope,7 and was created by Robin Gentry McGee, a health and lifestyle coach and chef, whose father suffered a brain injury that left him in a coma in 2005. Refusing to feed him what she calls “garbage,” she eventually created her own formula.

    “I basically created it because I had to. I was trying to save my dad’s life, and to me giving him the high fructose corn syrup sugar water was not an option,” she explained back in 2013.8 Her formula contains over 20 organic whole food ingredients. “Within six weeks the healing was [so] profound that his M.D. called me up and told me it was a miracle,” McGee told a reporter. “But it wasn’t a miracle, it was nutrition.”

    Science-Based Medicine Requires Patients to Take Control of Their Health
    John Ioannidis is one of the world's foremost experts on the credibility of medical research. He and his team have repeatedly shown that many of the conclusions biomedical researchers arrive at in their published studies are exaggerated or flat-out wrong. Yet this is the “science-based evidence” doctors use to prescribe drugs or recommend surgery. According to Ioannidis’ findings, as much as 90 percent of the published medical information relied on by doctors is flawed or incorrect.9

    He’s not the only one who has reached this conclusion. In fact, the idea that conventional medical treatments are “scientifically proven” and based on solid science is quite the misnomer. According to 2007 data from the British Medical Journal’s “Clinical Evidence” website, of the 2,500 treatments evaluated, only 15 percent were rated as beneficial. A whopping 46 percent had an efficacy rating of “unknown.”10,11

    In other words, nearly half of accepted medical treatments used in general practice were not scientifically proven to work or provide benefit for the patient. Granted, that’s a significant improvement over statistics compiled in 1978, when the Office of Technology Assessment concluded only 10 to 20 percent of medical treatments had evidence to support their use.12 Research also shows that many novel medical treatments gain popularity over older standards of care due mostly to clever marketing, not solid science.

    An investigation13 by the Mayo Clinic published in 2013 proved this point. To determine the overall effectiveness of medical care, researchers tracked the frequency of medical reversals over the past decade. Not only did they find that reversals are common across all classes of medical practice, but they too confirmed that a significant proportion of medical treatments offer no patient benefit.

    The most telling data in the report confirm that many common medical treatments actually do more harm than good. Of the studies that tested an existing standard of care, 40 percent reversed the practice as it was found to be either ineffective or harmful. Only 38 percent of the studies reaffirmed existing standards.

    The remaining 22 percent were inconclusive. This means that anywhere between 40 and 78 percent of the medical testing, treatments and procedures you receive are of no benefit to you — or are actually harmful — according to clinical studies.

    Scientific Bias and Fraud Are a Growing Problem
    In more recent years, the shocking prevalence of scientific bias and outright fraud14 has also garnered attention, as this trend undermines the credibility of the field of science altogether.15 A major weakness is the fact that many studies that fail to find a benefit never see the light of day, and when only positive findings are published, it presents an incredibly skewed view of the facts.

    Then there’s the influence of funding, which has repeatedly and consistently been shown to have a dramatic impact on study results. As previously reported in Live Science:16

    “One of the most well-known examples of bias involves the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) paroxetine (Paxil), an anti-anxiety medicine. The pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline suppressed results from four trials that not only failed to show treatment effectiveness for off-label use of its SSRI among children and teens, but also showed possible increased risk of suicidal tendencies in this age group.”

    Modern Medicine Is the Third Leading Cause of Death
    Doctors (not to mention drug companies) may bemoan the lack of trust and faith in their offerings, but you certainly cannot claim that it’s an undeserved trend. In 2000, Dr. Barbara Starfield published a study revealing that doctors are in fact the third leading cause of death in the U.S., killing an estimated 225,000 patients annually.17 Her statistics showed that each year:

    12,000 die from unnecessary surgery
    7,000 die from medication errors in hospitals
    20,000 die from other errors in hospitals
    80,000 die from hospital-acquired infections
    106,000 die from the negative side effects of drugs taken as prescribed
    Unfortunately, few believed it, and no affirmative action was ever taken to address and correct the situation. So, when new data was published in 2016, showing the situation has only gotten worse, I for one was not surprised. The study,18 published in the BMJ, concluded that medical errors now kill an estimated 250,000 Americans each year — an increase of about 25,000 people annually from Starfield’s estimates — and these numbers may still be vastly underestimated as deaths occurring at home or in nursing homes were not included.

    Many media outlets, including The Washington Post,19 bore headlines saying medical errors are “now” the leading cause of death, but the truth is, modern medicine has been the third leading cause of death for at least two decades, that we know of. Research20 published in 2013 estimated that preventable hospital errors kill 210,000 Americans each year — a figure that is very close to the latest statistics.

    However, when deaths related to diagnostic errors, errors of omission and failure to follow guidelines were included, the number skyrocketed to 440,000 preventable hospital deaths each year. That’s inching ever closer to the death toll from cancer — the second leading cause of death in the U.S. — which is projected to claim just over 609,000 Americans this year.21

    Overtesting, Overtreatment and Hospital-Acquired Infections Also Take a Toll
    Overtesting and overtreatment are also part of the problem. Instead of dissuading patients from unnecessary or questionable interventions, the system rewards waste and incentivizes disease over health. According to a 2012 report by the Institute of Medicine, an estimated 30 percent of all medical procedures, tests and medications may in fact be unnecessary,22 at a cost of at least $750 billion a year. To learn which tests and interventions may do more harm than good, browse through the Choosing Wisely website.23

    Other grim statistics revealing the hazards of modern medicine include rates of hospital-acquired infections. According to CDC statistics,24,25 1 in 25 patients end up with a hospital-acquired infection, and about 75,000 people die from these infections each year.26 Medicare patients may be at even greater risk. According to the 2011 Health Grades Hospital Quality in America Study,27 1 in 9 Medicare patients developed a hospital-acquired infection.

    Take Control of Your Health
    Considering everything mentioned so far, is it any wonder that trust in the medical profession has dwindled to about one-third, or that only 1 in 4 Americans trust the health care system as a whole? Bear in mind, the examples included above are just a sampling. I haven’t even touched on the corruption and conflicts of interest involving the food industry at large, or the fact that junk food purveyors fund and provide much of the educational material for our nutrition professionals.

    The take-home message is that you cannot be too careful when it comes to medical and nutritional advice. On the whole, our medical establishment has a long way to go before they will regain their old aura as the ultimate authority on health. In the meantime, remember you are ultimately responsible for your own health, and while it’s certainly wise to listen to health professionals you trust, it cannot hurt to get a second or third opinion.

    Seeking input and feedback from alternative health professionals can also provide you with alternatives you may never get from a conventional doctor. More often than not, successfully addressing chronic illness will require a holistic approach that may include both conventional and complementary approaches.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  25. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Blacklight43 (6th February 2018), Bubu (4th December 2018), Hym (7th February 2018), Mike (6th February 2018), Tree Of Life (3rd December 2018)

  26. Link to Post #15
    Avalon Member Hym's Avatar
    Join Date
    27th June 2011
    Location
    Eastern Pacific
    Posts
    550
    Thanks
    7,946
    Thanked 3,320 times in 526 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    I always considered the advent of the American Medical Association in 1847 to be the foundation for the elimination of all natural healing methods, herbal formulations and midwifery. In 1850 the ratio of Homeopaths to MD's was 5 to 1.
    During the American Flu Outbreak of 1917, incorrectly called the Spanish Flu Pandemic of 1918 because the soldiers from the states brought it to Spain (and Europe) a patient treated by a homeopath had a much higher survival rate than one treated by an MD.
    The same applies now when the CDC suggests/recommends that all get a flu shot that they themselves claim is anywhere from only 10% to 17% effective.

  27. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hym For This Post:

    Bubu (4th December 2018), Franny (7th February 2018), onawah (7th February 2018), Tree Of Life (3rd December 2018)

  28. Link to Post #16
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,151
    Thanks
    27,086
    Thanked 47,715 times in 9,723 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Water and Homeopathy: Latest Discoveries at Science’s Cutting Edge
    Nobel Laureate – Prof Brian Josephson“New Horizons in Water Science — The Evidence for Homeopathy?”
    Presentation by Cambridge Professor Emeritus Brian Josephson at the conference (July 14, 2018), introduction by Lord Kenneth Ward-Atherton

    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a..._rid=453965450
    STORY AT-A-GLANCE
    "A major research conference took place at London’s Royal Society of Medicine that confirmed the therapeutic effects of extremely small doses (nanodoses) of homeopathic medicines
    Two Nobel Prize-winning scientists and other esteemed researchers from across the world presented compelling evidence that medicinal agents not only persist in water, but they retain therapeutic effects in these nanodoses
    Our bodies’ hormones and cell-signaling systems also operate at this super small nanodose level
    Professor Vladimir Voeikov asserted Russian scientists had known for decades that tiny doses of medicines have dramatic effects on biological systems
    Professor Jerry Pollack of the University of Washington is one of the leading experts on water who reported on his research, which confirms water has the capacity to store huge amounts of medicinal information, enabling homeopathic nanodoses to fully impact a person’s physiology
    By Dana Ullman, MPH, CCH and Lionel Milgrom, Ph.D., RHom, MARH

    If the common physician, scientist, and educated consumer were to believe Wikipedia, they would assume that there is absolutely no research that shows the efficacy of homeopathic medicines in the treatment of any ailment. Furthermore, they would conclude homeopathic medicines are so small in dose, there is literally “nothing” in a homeopathic medicine.

    And if you are this gullible and vulnerable to Big Pharma propaganda, then we’ve got an island to sell you for $24.00! According to the Washington Post, Wikipedia’s article on homeopathy and Jesus Christ are the two most controversial on that website in four leading languages (English, French, German and Spanish).

    Research Shows Efficacy of Homeopathic Medicine
    The fact of the matter is that research showing the efficacy of homeopathic medicines has been published in some of the world’s most respected medical journals. Here’s a roll call of just a few of them:

    The Lancet;1 BMJ2,3(British Medical Journal); Chest (the publication of the American College of Chest Physicians);4 Pediatrics (publication of the American Academy of Pediatrics);5 Cancer(journal of the American Cancer Society);6 Journal of Clinical Oncology;7 Pediatrics Infectious Disease Journal (publication of the European Society of Pediatric Infectious Diseases);8 European Journal of Pediatrics (publication of the Swiss Society of Pediatrics and the Belgium Society of Pediatrics).9

    Would you be shocked to learn that Wikipedia doesn’t mention 8 of the 9 references here? Not only have individual studies found efficacy in homeopathic medicines, but various systematic reviews or meta-analyses have likewise concluded the effects of homeopathic medicines are different to those of a placebo. The newest review of homeopathic research published in Systematic Reviews10 confirmed a difference between the effects of homeopathic treatment and of placebo.

    In reviewing the “highest quality studies,” the researchers found that patients given homeopathic treatment were almost twice as likely to experience a therapeutic benefit as those given a placebo.

    Further, in reviewing a total of 22 clinical trials, patients given homeopathic remedies experienced greater than 50 percent likelihood to have benefited from the treatment than those given a placebo. Once again, Wikipedia doesn’t even mention this new review of clinical research in homeopathy.

    This important review of clinical research also acknowledged that 4 of the 5 leading previous systematic reviews of homeopathic research found a benefit from homeopathic treatment over that of placebo:

    "Five systematic reviews have examined the RCT research literature on homeopathy as a whole, including the broad spectrum of medical conditions that have been researched and by all forms of homeopathy: four of these ‘global’ systematic reviews reached the conclusion that, with important caveats, the homeopathic intervention probably differs from placebo."

    And if that wasn’t enough, the largest and most comprehensive review of basic science research (fundamental physio-chemical research, botanical studies, animal studies, and in vitro studies using human cells) and clinical research into homeopathy ever sponsored by a governmental agency was undertaken recently in Switzerland.11

    This Swiss report affirmed that homeopathic high-potencies seem to induce regulatory effects and specific changes to cells and living organisms. It also reported that 20 of the 22 systematic reviews of clinical research testing homeopathic medicines detected at least a trend in favor of homeopathy. Would it puzzle you that this important review of homeopathic research is not even mentioned or referenced by Wikipedia?

    Homeopathic Conference at the Royal Society of Medicine
    July 14, 2018, we attended a groundbreaking conference in London entitled “New Horizons in Water Science — ‘The Evidence for Homeopathy?’” in the hallowed halls of the UK’s Royal Society of Medicine.

    Held at the behest of (Lord) Aaron Kenneth Ward-Atherton who organized and chaired the event, Ken is not only a practicing homeopath and integrated medical physician, he also has been a formal advisor on Integrated Medicine to a member of the UK government’s Department of Health and had ongoing support from various Peers in the British House of Lords.

    This conference will no doubt have sent shockwaves around the world, as delegates from over 20 countries listened in awe to two Nobel Laureates (Cambridge physicist emeritus Professor Brian Josephson and AIDS virus discoverer, Professor Luc Montagnier, M.D.) and several world-class scientists of equal academic stature from the U.S., UK, Israel and Russia.

    And what they were saying was pure heresy to conventional medicine! As it turns out, research in water science seems to support the notion there is a significant difference between the biological and physical actions of homeopathic medicines and plain ordinary water.

    We should point out that this special conference did not try to review the body of clinical research (above) that verifies the efficacy of homeopathic medicines, nor did it seek to describe all the basic science studies that show that homeopathic medicines have biological or physical effects.

    Instead, this conference chose to focus on more fundamental questions: Does the process of remedy production in homeopathy (i.e., dilution and succession — vigorous shaking — of a medicinal substance in water/alcohol) have an effect on the water’s long-range structure that is different than simple pure water? And second, are their sound and plausible explanations for how homeopathic medicines persist in water solutions despite multiple dilutions?

    Because most physicians and scientists are completely unfamiliar with the fascinating and amazing qualities and abilities of water, their assertions on what is and isn’t possible with homeopathic medicines represent an embarrassingly uninformed viewpoint.

    Such assertions are at best unscientific, at worst, they simply represent sheer ignorance. The best scientists are humble in their assertions due to the fact that they know their knowledge is always limited. The average physician or scientist, however, may tend to arrogance, particularly on those subjects which he/she actually knows nothing about.

    Biomolecules Communicate Over Distance
    Professor Brian Josephson Ph.D., of Cambridge University UK was the first speaker. He echoed remarks he had made in the magazine New Scientist, saying:

    “Simple-minded analysis might suggest that water, being a fluid, it cannot have a structure of the kind that such a picture would demand. But cases such as that of liquid crystals, which while flowing like an ordinary fluid can maintain an ordered structure over macroscopic distances, show the limitations of such ways of thinking.

    There have not, to the best of my knowledge, been any refutations of homeopathy that remain valid after this particular point is taken into account.”

    Professor Josephson powerfully critiqued generally accepted theories of how biomolecules react with their substrates. Conventionally, these are thought to “match” like a lock and a key, but only when they are in direct physical contact. Not so, says Josephson.

    Like his famous predecessor, Professor Jacques Benveniste (who Josephson hosted at Cambridge University’s Cavendish Laboratory back in March 1999), he argues that they can “communicate” over some distance long before they come together, and that such interactions are best described by quantum theory and electromagnetic signaling.

    Josephson also lambasted those scientists who demand that homeopathic medicines need to get “chemically analyzed.” He asserted that applying chemical analysis to homeopathic remedies will tell you no more about their properties than applying chemical analysis to a CD will tell you what music is on it. Chemical analysis is too limited a tool for either.

    Further, Josephson went on the show some remarkably beautiful photos and videos that provide powerful evidence of how hyper-sensitive water is to sound. Using an impressive new technology called cymascopy (developed by acoustics engineer John Stuart Reid),12 Josephson was able to demonstrate the incredible influence sound has on water using this technology, producing stunning dynamic wave patterns in water that follow changes in a sound’s pitch.13

    This video shows dramatically how the dynamic structure of water changes as music is played. And for this to occur, there has to be an ordering of molecules within the water, to give it that dynamic structure; what is commonly referred to as a “memory.”

    “Such is life,” Josephson concluded. “Order arises spontaneously. Creation of order (order-ing) is a part of nature. Order includes disorder (fluctuations), so order requires order to be present. With crystals, the order is static; with life it is dynamic. There we have ordering within activity. Up until now, our present understanding of all this is qualitative and limited, but this must be the next step for science.”

    Finally, Josephson wryly responded to the chronic ignorance of homeopathy by its skeptics saying, “The idea that water can have a memory can be readily refuted by any one of a number of easily understood, invalid arguments.”

    Physical Properties of Aqueous Systems
    Next to speak was Professor Vladimir Voeikov from the Lomonosov Moscow State University in Russia. A world expert on the chemical and physical properties of aqueous systems and their key role in the vital processes of living systems, Voeikov also took aim at critics who scoff at homeopathy’s plausibility.

    He then launched into a description of the extensive and highly detailed work on the biological effects of ultra-high dilutions (or UHDs) that has been on-going in Russia since the 1980’s.

    One of the unfortunate side-effects of the perennial distrust existing between Russia and the West has been access to research like this, mainly because it has appeared only in Russian (i.e., Cyrillic) journals. Consequently, Voeikov had a lot of ground to make up — which he did in no uncertain terms!

    And much to the audience’s surprise, it turns out that Professor Jacques Benveniste (who in 1988 was so pilloried by scientists, sceptics and the journal Nature, his reputation was trashed and he lost his laboratories and his funding) was by no means the first to suggest that solutions diluted and strongly agitated to the point where there couldn’t possibly be any molecules of the original substance left could still exert biological effects.

    Delving back into the literature, it had been announced around a century before Benveniste. In 1955, a review had already been published into the action of UHDs.

    Drawing on his and his Russian colleagues’ work, Voeikov concluded that conventional ideas of how water dissolves substances is actually incorrect. Until now, when something dissolves in water, its particles were thought to be randomly distributed throughout the solvent. As the solution is continually diluted, these particles simply reduce in number until at a certain dilution (known as the Avogadro limit) they disappear completely.

    Consequently, if a solution is diluted beyond this limit, as there are apparently no particles left, such UHDs cannot possibly exert any effects, let alone on biological systems. Therefore, homeopathy (which sometimes uses dilutions of substances way beyond the Avogadro limit) must be complete bunkum. So much for conventional thinking.

    What Voeikov and his colleagues have shown time and again, is that the process of homeopathic dilution and agitation, even down passed the Avogadro limit (so that no particles are supposed to still be present), does NOT get rid of all the dissolved substance.

    Instead, microscopically tiny “clumps” of the dissolved substance — known as nanoassociates — remain behind and these are biologically active. What’s more, various analytical techniques can be used to track these nanoassociates, and they affect water in many ways that make it different from pure water, e.g., electrical conductivity, surface tension, etc. So, a solution diluted and agitated beyond the Avogadro limit is anything but pure water.

    Nanoassociates Violate Conventional Laws of Behavior
    If that wasn’t enough, Voeikov and his colleagues have shown that so-called ordinary solutions — the kind that we make up every day and that have not been sequentially diluted and agitated as homeopaths do — also contain nanoassociates, violating what has for years been understood as “laws of behavior” prescribed in standard textbooks on aqueous solutions.

    So, not only are all those sceptics and naysayers going to have to get used to homeopathic dilutions and their effects being real, they will have to completely reassess their understanding of what happens when ANY substance is dissolved in water. Those whose solemn duty it is to rewrite textbooks are going to have a field day!

    Barely able to catch our breath, we were then treated to one of the most inspirational talks of the whole conference, delivered by Jerry Pollack, Ph.D., professor of bioengineering at Seattle’s University of Washington. Pollack is probably best known for his 2014 book, “The Fourth Phase of Water: Beyond Solid, Liquid, and Vapor,” in which he outlines in highly readable terms some of his and his team’s amazing discoveries about water.

    Exclusion Zone Water May Have Significant Implications for Homeopathy
    Chiefly, these concern what happens to water when it is in contact with a surface, e.g., a membrane. And for any doubting Thomas out there we should point out that Pollack’s amazing discoveries about water have been independently verified many times.

    It turns out that the water molecules closest to the membrane surface form an almost crystalline alignment that has the effect of excluding any dissolved particles in the water. And these exclusion zones — or EZs, as they are called — have properties that are totally different from the bulk water, and whose consequences will have profound effects not only on our understanding of water, but how we use it.

    For example, depending on the nature of the membrane surface, charge separation occurs between the EZ layer and the bulk water phase. Pollack showed us how this phenomenon could be used, not only to produce an incredibly simple battery powered only by radiant energy, but how it could be the basis of a water desalination system. At the moment, this last application would need to be scaled up before it could of any practical use, but if it could, there must surely be a Nobel prize in the offing.

    In addition, bearing in mind that blood is mainly water being pumped through tubes of biological membranes, Pollack suggested that the same charge-separating mechanism that powered his radiant energy battery, might also assist in pushing our blood through narrow vessels far removed from the pumping action of the heart. If so, such a discovery will have huge ramifications for our understanding of physiology.

    It turns out that Pollack’s semi-crystalline EZs can not only be separated, they are able to electromagnetically store information in their molecular structure. And as the preparation of homeopathic remedies also involves water solutions in contact with surfaces, it is quite feasible his new EZ discoveries will have a huge impact on our understanding of water memory and homeopathy.

    In fact, Pollack asserts that water has a HUGE capacity to store information. Further, he notes that homeopathic process of succussion (vigorous shaking of water in glass) creates increased avenues for EZ water that then creates increased water storage.

    Classic Homeopathic Methods Optimize Storage of Information in Water
    The founder of homeopathy, Dr. Samuel Hahnemann (1755-1843), was both a physician and the author of a leading textbook for pharmacists of his day. His many experiments attempting to reduce the harmful side-effects of medicinal substances, led him to a method of dilution and agitation which homeopaths use till this day.

    Intriguingly, what the new science presented at this conference is telling us is that Hahnemann’s method seems to optimize storage of medicinal information within the very structure of water itself! Even after more than 200 years, Hahnemann’s discovery of homeopathy and his contributions to medicine and pharmacology are still being uncovered.

    Dr. Luc Montagnier was introduced to homeopathy and homeopathic research by the French immunologist Dr. Jacques Benveniste. In a remarkable interview published in Science magazine of December 24, 2010,14 Montagnier expressed support for the often maligned and misunderstood medical specialty of homeopathic medicine.

    “What I can say now is that the high dilutions (used in homeopathy) are right. High dilutions of something are not nothing. They are water structures which mimic the original molecules.”

    Montagnier concluded the interview when asked if he is concerned that he is drifting into pseudoscience. He replied adamantly: “No, because it’s not pseudoscience. It’s not quackery. These are real phenomena which deserve further study.”

    ‘Teleportation’ Effects
    Montagnier’s study found that under the right conditions electromagnetic signals can be transmitted from test tubes containing a highly diluted DNA sample to a different test tube containing only water, and that when enzymes which copy DNA molecules are then added to this water, they behave as if DNA molecules are present, producing new DNA molecules.15

    This “teleportation” effect of the DNA, from one test tube to another was found to occur only when the homeopathic procedure of sequential dilution, with vigorous shaking of the test tube was utilized. Also, Montagnier was coauthored with several highly-respected scientists another article that was published in a leading scientific journal.16 This article posits quantum effects beyond simple chemistry.

    Montagnier’s studies found that highly diluted DNA from pathogenic bacterial and viral species is able to emit specific radio waves and that "these radio waves [are] associated with ‘nanostructures’ in the solution that might be able to recreate the pathogen."

    A writer for New Scientist magazine has asserted that, if its conclusions are true, "these would be the most significant experiments performed in the past 90 years, demanding re-evaluation of the whole conceptual framework of modern chemistry."17

    While Montagnier’s work shows the influence of electromagnetic fields having a biological effect, other researchers at the conference found that nanodoses of the original homeopathic medicine persists in water solutions. Dr. Jayesh Bellare of the prestigious India Institute of Technology described his seminal research that was published in Langmuir, a highly-respected journal published by the American Chemistry Society.18

    Bellare and his colleagues found that six different homeopathic medicines, all made from minerals (gold, silver, copper, tin, zinc and platinum), that were diluted 1:100 six times, 30 times and 200 times were each found in nanodoses from one of three different types of spectroscopy.

    Bellare and his team explained that homeopathic medicines are usually made in glass bottles, and the vigorous shaking of the water in these bottles releases nanosized fragments of silica from the glass walls, and the substance being made into a medicine is literally pushed into these floating silica “chips.”

    Then, when 99 percent of the water is poured out, the silica chips cling to the glass walls. The scientists found each of the six minerals persisting in the water no matter how many times they diluted the medicine. When one considers that many of the most important hormones and cell-signaling agents of the body operate at nanodose levels, the nanodoses found in homeopathic medicines may explain how these medicines work.

    Still further, the fact that nanodoses are much more able to cross the blood-brain-barrier as well as most cell membranes provides additional insight into how and why homeopathic nanodoses can elicit significant and powerful immune responses from the body.

    Afterword: Stop Press!
    The day after Dana Ullman’s interview with Dr. Joseph Mercola, a very important study on homeopathy was published on the website of one of the world’s leading scientific journals, Nature.

    Nature.com just published a collection of studies that tested different homeopathic potencies of Rhus toxicodendron (also known as Rhus tox and Toxicodendron pubescens), including 2X, 4X, 6X, 8X, 12X, 24X and 30X in the treatment of neuropathy in rats.19

    Previous research had found that Rhus toxicodendron has significant anti-infammatory, anti-arthritic and immunomodulatory activities. This new research evaluated antinociceptive (pain-reducing) efficacy of Rhus tox in the neuropathic pain and delineated its underlying mechanism. More specifically, this research found that this homeopathic medicine showed significant antioxidative and anti-inflammatory properties.

    This study found that homeopathic doses of Rhus tox 24X and 30X had dramatic effects that equaled the results from a known conventional drug, Gabapentin, and did so in much safer doses. Conventional scientists have consistently asserted that these extremely small doses of homeopathic medicines could not have ANY effects, but this study, like an increasing number of other such studies, have proven conventional scientists are wrong.

    The above described study didn’t investigate the influence of water in its study, but it did confirm that homeopathic nanodoses can have powerful biological and clinical effects.

    Dedication
    This article is dedicated to Dr. Peter Fisher, The (now-late) Physician to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. A graduate of Cambridge University and a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and the Faculty of Homeopathy, he was a widely published expert in rheumatology and forms of complementary and alternative medicine.

    Fisher chaired the World Health Organization’s working group on homeopathy and was a member of WHO’s Expert Advisory Panel on Traditional and Complementary Medicine. He served as Clinical Director for 18 years and Director of Research at the Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine (formerly the Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital) for 22 years.

    He was also president of the Faculty of Homeopathy and editor-in-chief of the journal, Homeopathy (the leading research journal in the field). Fisher was awarded the Polish Academy of Medicine’s Albert Schweitzer Gold Medal in 2007. Fisher also served as moderator for the second half of the homeopathic research conference discussed in this article.

    Besides all of his academic achievements, Fisher had a wicked, dry, even very dry, British sense of humor. He was known to provide scathing critiques of the many un-informed and ill-informed skeptics of homeopathy whose criticisms of homeopathy simply proved their sheer ignorance of the subject. Sadly, on August 15, 2018, Fisher was riding his bicycle in London on “drive your bike to work day,” and was hit by a truck and killed.

    Dana Ullman, MPH, CCH, has authored 10 books on homeopathy, 4 chapters in medical textbooks, has published 40 books on homeopathy by his colleagues (co-published with North Atlantic Books), and directs Homeopathic Educational Services. a leading homeopathic resource center to help people access homeopathic books, medicines, software, and e-courses (www.homeopathic.com).

    He has also created a special e-course on “Learning to Use a Homeopathic Medicine Kit” (details at https://homeopathicfamilymedicine.com/). He also maintains a homeopathic practice where he “sees” most of his patients via Skype, various video apps, or the simple telephone.

    Dr Lionel R Milgrom PhD FRSC FRSA MARH RHom has been a research chemist for 40 years (co-founder of a university anti-cancer biotech spin-out company) with many publications and a text book to his credit. He has also been a practicing homeopath for 20 years.

    His main research interest these days is in the understanding of homeopathy within both scientific and philosophical contexts, and has published extensively in these areas. He has also published the first volume of an ebook trilogy entitled “Homeopathy and Science: A Guide for the Perplexed.” "

    ( Talk about a conspiracy! )
    Last edited by onawah; 25th October 2018 at 07:09.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  29. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (25th October 2018), Bubu (4th December 2018), Constance (24th May 2019), DeeMetrios (29th October 2018), Tree Of Life (3rd December 2018)

  30. Link to Post #17
    United States Avalon Member conk's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Language
    Southern English
    Posts
    3,917
    Thanks
    10,963
    Thanked 10,817 times in 2,970 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Sorry if I'm repeating what someone may have already posted, but read up on the debate between Antoine Beauchamp and Louis Pasteur. The money sided with Pasteur and the rest you know. Natural medicine died with the advent and birth of the drug empire. Spoiler alert: Pasteur was a liar, a fraud, and a thief.
    The quantum field responds not to what we want; but to who we are being. Dr. Joe Dispenza

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to conk For This Post:

    Bubu (4th December 2018)

  32. Link to Post #18
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,151
    Thanks
    27,086
    Thanked 47,715 times in 9,723 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    How natural medicine continues to be destroyed...
    105 Million Dollar Crucifixion of Natural Medicine
    Published on November 14, 2018
    https://drsircus.com/general/105-mil...65d5e922faac44


    "In 2015, cancer patient Dawn Kali sued Robert O. Young, Ph.D. in San Diego County Superior Court alleging negligence and fraud. She said he had advised her to forgo chemotherapy and traditional treatment, and instead go with treatment in line with his alkaline theories. Sounds like reasonable advice and Dr. Young has been a leading proponent of pH Medicine, which is really the science of oxygen, carbon dioxide and hydrogen.

    Young’s work is based on the theory that acidity in the body is the cause of disease and that an alkaline diet is the answer. In terms of my book Hydrogen Medicine this is and incomplete formulation. Acidity is a cover concept for low oxygen and high concentrations of positive hydrogen ions, both of which set the stage for most chronic diseases including cancer. When that is the case diet can help; but is usually not a strong enough process to right what is wrong. Some purists can manage it and some doctors can administer programs that have their patients fundamentally changing their eating habits healing them in the process.

    Was this patient, who was awarded 105 million, threatened with force to undergo natural treatments. Was she imprisoned against her will? Did Dr. Young made it impossible for her to go for traditional oncological treatments? Chemotherapy and radiation treatments (almost at lethal doses) are used to treat cancer even though these treatments cause cancer but when have you ever hear of an oncologist being hauled in front of a judge?

    Learn a system of medicine that is safe, simple and affordable! Discover Dr Sircus Natural Allopathic Medicine »
    Patrick Swan, one of Kali’s attorneys, said his 45-year-old client’s oncologist told Kali she has about three or four years to live. She now has stage 4 cancer. “The jury listened carefully and understood the gravity of the evidence and rendered a verdict that was commensurate with the damage Ms. Kali suffered, and will suffer,” Swan said.

    Swan also said he hopes the verdict “will have an effect on the miracle, cure-all cancer industry.” Young does use the word miracle in his book title but most of the hard-working practitioners of alternative and complementary medicine don’t make wild promises, but they do practice good medicine.

    Young’s attorney, Conrad Joyner, said his client believes that his views have been suppressed because they are not in line with the medical establishment. The patient at some point worked for Young so must have been aware that Young’s theories were outside of the establishment. We should be free to choose our treatments, but most oncologists do not believe in the freedom of choice since they believe that their treatments are the only choice.

    During the criminal trial, Deputy Dist. Atty. Gina Darvas painted Young as a charlatan who made money peddling pseudoscience to desperate, dying people. Oncology is worse than pseudoscience and its violent treatments are peddled and forced on desperate dying adults and children.

    The criminal case highlighted his controversial theories and the pricey treatments he offered to seriously ill or dying patients, who in some cases were given intravenous fluids mixed with baking soda at $500 a pop. That price is high for a treatment that few doctors know how to administer correctly but just ask any doctor from ICU and emergency departments the use of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) in the treatment of patients close to deaths door what this natural treatment is good for.

    What screams out of this case is the huge fine. Although Young might not be a saint, or follow in the lockstep of medicine, he is scientifically more correct than the system which is accusing him. Most oncologists have not the slightest idea what pH Medicine is about. This is the same thing as saying they have no idea about the importance of CO2 even though oxygen is dangerous without this precious gas that doubles as a medicine.

    Dr. Alina Vasiljeva and Dr. David Nias wrote, “At the end of the 19th century, scientists Bohr and Verigo discovered what seemed a strange law; a decreased level of carbon dioxide in the blood leads to decreased oxygen supply to the cells in the body including the brain, heart, kidneys etc. Carbon dioxide (CO2) was found to be responsible for the bond between oxygen and haemoglobin. If the level of carbon dioxide in the blood is lower than normal, then this leads to difficulties in releasing oxygen from haemoglobin. Hence the Verigo-Bohr law.”

    In fact, modern medicine in general is unaware of pH Medicine. Classic point in case:

    Certain viruses (including the rhinoviruses and coronaviruses that are most often responsible for the common cold and influenza viruses that produce flu) infect host cells by fusion with cellular membranes at low pH. Thus, they are classified as "pH-dependent viruses." Fusion of viral and cellular membranes is pH dependent. Fusion depends on the acidification of the endosomal compartment. Fusion at the endosome level is triggered by conformational changes in viral glycoproteins induced by the low pH of this cellular compartment.”

    Radical shifts in pH represents a potent method of practicing medicine. We can violently pull the rug out from under most pathogens by bombarding them with a blast of alkalinity. Cancer cells routinely form in most people’s bodies in areas of low voltage, low oxygen and acidic pH. Bottom line: the more that acid conditions prevail the more aggressive cancer gets."
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  33. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (14th November 2018), Bubu (4th December 2018), Hervé (14th November 2018), lilac (14th November 2018), Paul (15th November 2018), Sophocles (14th November 2018)

  34. Link to Post #19
    Avalon Member Unicorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Location
    Myself
    Posts
    191
    Thanks
    1,370
    Thanked 765 times in 171 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    Bravo, Michelle Marie! and congratulations

    Quote Posted by Michelle Marie (here)
    I'm currently learning more about frequencies and methods to reprogram the subconscious mind.
    If you can share about your learning and findings here it would be very welcome.
    Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle (Plato)

  35. The Following User Says Thank You to Unicorn For This Post:

    onawah (15th November 2018)

  36. Link to Post #20
    United States Moderator James's Avatar
    Join Date
    6th November 2018
    Posts
    146
    Thanks
    275
    Thanked 1,213 times in 139 posts

    Default Re: How Natural Medicine (was) Destroyed in 1910

    It’s a real shame that what we call modern Western medicine has such a shady past that still influences the way it’s practiced today.

    Elitism, isolationism, and traditionalism all come to mind.

    I would absolutely support an evidence-based eclectic school of medicine, that is, a practice based on treatments and therapies rooted in solid data that draws from all varieties of healthcare that have sufficient efficacy research.

    Over the past four years, I had to pull tricks from many different medicine bags to stay on this side of the ground. A buffet of novel surgeries, pharmaceuticals, herbs, physical rehabilitation exercises, and mindfulness practices got me to a point where I can start to put my illness behind me.

    If I didn’t have the luxury of knowing other systems, I’d have only received the first two options, and certainly wouldn’t be doing too well today.

  37. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to James For This Post:

    Bubu (4th December 2018), East Sun (13th December 2018), leavesoftrees (15th November 2018), onawah (14th November 2018)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts