--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00088Date: 07/02/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 11:21pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Acupuncture Hi Jane, > AF> Why are you so against natural selection? > AF> Natural selection will also eliminate those tawdry sex tourists > AF> Jane..i.e. at least the unhealthy ones...although it is amazing > AF> how many Germans (for example) have travelled to places like > AF> Thailand for many years for one purpose only and have never > AF> contracted anything (except an empty wallet) despite refusing, > AF> or even being requested to, take precautions. ;-) > Because it lacks any logic. If you claim that natural selection is illogical it would seem that you have a very poor regard for the laws of Nature. > I have taken care of infants who were > premature but otherwise would grow up and be very healthy adults, IF > they got the kind of care necessary for them to survive. For every premature infant in the U.S.A. there are millions of perfectly healthy infants elsewhere who could all survive the famine conditions prevailing in their countries merely by sharing the money which the rest of the world spends on PETS (not to mention candy, ice-cream, tobacco and alcohol etc.). OTOH (despite how sad it may seem to some) the very fact that these children are not all surviving merely means that they were born in the wrong place at the wrong time...i.e. natural selection. The fact that we are helping unhealthy mothers to have children certainly has nothing at all to do with natural selection. Such actions are the initial steps down a road which will eventually lead to widespread genetic manipulation and even cloning in some countries. > I have taken care of full term babies who were born to mothers that > smoked pot and looked as though they needed to be re-baked. > We could do a lot better than your methods. Notice you failed to mention what we could do a lot better and how the consequences of such actions would lead to a better world than that ruled by Nature and hence natural selection and the survival of the fittest. Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00089Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 12:39am \/To: ROYCE SHARP (Read 1 times) Subj: Reply 1 of 3 Hi Royce, Thanks for your reply...although your questions are in some cases so fundamental that I would have to write a book or two (which have most certainly been written before many times by others) in order to provide you with the extensive reply you expect. Nevertheless, I will try within the limited framework of this echo to at least guide you in the right direction. >> If it doesn't work for you, TO BAD! Go to your M.D. and get your >> drugs. >> Pop those pills & shoot up your veins with all the dope you want. >> And when you are on all your drugs and wondering why you are in such >> bad shape, let your mind contimplate what COULD have been. > AF> I can understand your reaction (heard it all before) which probably > AF> stems from the fact that you don't know my views all that well. I > Now that I have calmed down from the anger I felt as a result of your > earlier message, shall we analize the line of thinking ref. ALTMED and > other treatments available? I love analysts. ;-) > AF> am totally against all forms of treatment, i.e. as long as the > AF> cause and hence a preventative strategy has not been researched > AF> first (and with more funds than are spent on treatments...which do > AF> not cure anything). > I have a problem with this line of thinking in that it does not take > into consideration the multitude of ailments for which there are no > cures. There is a way of either curing (whereby only the body itself is able to cure anything) or preventing all human ailments. All human ailments (with the exception of physical injuries) are caused by bad health (which in turn can be due to anything from genetics... i.e. bad parent(s), to ignorance of how society is inducing one to live or even to just plain "don't care as I leave my health in the hands of the docs..even though I am aware of my wicked ways". > If a person has (as a simple example) arthritis, they will > commonly contact a doctor who will recomend NSAIDs to reduce the > swelling & hence reduce the pain. As you said, there are side effects > to this, and many other types of treatment, but with careful > management, the side effects can be overcome and reduced to nothing > more than a minor anoyance. People all function the same way and thus any side-effects found in any particular study will effect all sooner or later (i.e. depending on the state of health of the person..here we can differ.. at the time) when taking any particular medication. In addition, there are no studies of why people contract certain illnesses many years after taking some medication and it is thus not certain how long any medication may take to produce some (thus probably unknown) side-effect. With thalidomide, for example, we were lucky, because the effects became obvious not more than nine months after its use (which just shows how reliable the pre-testing of drugs before being introduced onto the market really is). > Now, as we all know, there is no cure > for arthritis. Researchers have been working on a cure for arthritis > for longer than anyone can truely say. Maybe there is a cure out > there, maybe they never will find a cure. The question is -- What is > a person to do until that cure is found? A bad example because most forms of gout and arthritis (not osteoarthritis) are reversible (meaning they can be cured by the body if the body is instructed properly and posesses the necessary health requisites. The American Natural Hygiene Society (and even the Mayo Clinic..which is at least a quarter alternative with an increasing tendency) can give you full details here if you do not trust sources from other countries. > My wife happens to suffer from Lupus. One of the symptoms of Lupus > is arthritis. Since there is no cure for Lupus or arthritis, we must > treat the symptoms. Every Dr. we have talked to says treating the > symptoms is all that can be done at this point. -------- Which type of Lupus are you talking about? When a doc talks about a cure BTW, he or she means a medical cure...i.e. despite the fact that a medicine has never cured anything. Only the body is capable of curing anything...medicines are invasive and alter body functions with the claim that either they treat symptoms or "help" the body (always at a cost because of their very nature) to help itself. The only really effective medicine ever "discovered" (i.e. not brewed) was a totally natural fungus known as penicillium which was first used to treat an relatively unnatural infection (i.e. tetanus as a result of dirty war wounds infected with the soil bacteria clostridium tetani..a bacteria which is perfectly harmless if eaten). We now clean our foods (i.e. to get rid off unhealthy pesticides etc. as well as unwanted grit rather than harmless soil organisms) to the extent that we no longer take in penicillium at all and to the extent that allergies to it thus started to increase after it was introduced on a larger scale to treat all sorts of minor bacterial ailments (and to the extent that many bacteria reacted by developing immunity that much quicker than they ever would have done...i.e. much faster than our body immune sytem had time to adjust). All ensuing antibiotics (due to the stupid demand of the patients and the willingness to prescribe of the docs to earn a good living) have now also become more or less ineffective (not least because people are getting more in their..often daily..meat than the docs ever prescribe even the worst hypochondriac! The next bout of plagues (not due this time to poor sanitary conditions but due to immune systems weakened by antibiotics etc. and the lack of any effective antibiotics, as well as the stupidity or necessity of man to eat things he shouldn't) is thus just around the corner. > AF> The only person who needs outside health is an unhealthy person > AF> Thus neither acupuncture or morphium address the cause or causes > AF> of an ailment. > Addressing the cause or causes of an ailment is not the only objective > in treating the patient. Allowing the patient to be functional and > capable of living a happy and productive life, is a MAJOR part of the > equation. Here you address (with or without being aware of it) two completely different and separate issues. I stated in my original post (and you quoted it further down) that the only justification for today's medication is to bring relief (they can not cure and thus natural selection will claim them in the...often earlier..end) to those who currently live on this planet and are suffering or slowly dying THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN. IOW they have been trusting TV and other media commercials and certain commercially-oriented docs and nutritionists etc. rather than taking the trouble to search out what may be a better and more reliable information source. The second issue is that addressing the cause or causes of an ailment HAS to be the only objective of an effective health research program. Then and only then can an ailment be prevented. A multi-million medical industry based on "treating" with dubious concoctions a society which is purposely left in the dark as to effective methods of making itself healthier can not (and should not) be given the upper hand. A parent can be jailed for refusing to let a child with cancer have the "benefits" of chemotherapy even though the average life expectancy of such patients is usually no more than five years. We have a society which now sanctions medicine by LAW. To be continued....... Best regards, Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00090Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 01:11am \/To: ROYCE SHARP (Read 1 times) Subj: Reply 2 of 3 Hi again Royce, > AF> In addition, pain killers in > AF> particular often mask or supress a body response (pain or swelling > AF> etc.) and thus merely give patients a false sense of security whilst > AF> providing a degree of relief (often with other side-effects) > AF> rather than any possibility of a cure or at least an improvement. > Pain killers (and other drugs with simular effects and side effects) > are > touchy treatments. This is a situation where the patient must take a > very active role in their own treatment (as they always should). A > decision must be made to balance the effects of no treatment (or > minimal > treatment) with the effects of treatments focused on masking the body's > responses. Looking into one's own heart is the only answer to this > delimma. You are being subjective here, whereas any approach which will benefit mankind (which also means future generations) must most certainly take an objective stance. > AF> Whilst it is important until a way for the body to cure itself has > AF> been found to provide relief to those in severe pain, > To this, I do truely agree. It does, however, stand in direct contrast Which is the quote which I mentioned you quoted earlier on. All people NOW on this earth are entitled (if not merely because they have been fooled into bad health) to any treatment which will make their (mostly more limited) lives easier. But this is no approach to future health care. > to the opinions you have expressed in the past, but I'll overlook that > for now. If you think about what I said then or now...you will realise that this is not in fact the case. > AF> dowsing > AF> the embers of a burnt house will not re-establish that house in > AF> all its former glory. > If I may borrow your parable; I would much rather live in a house that > has had the back pourch burnt off, than to live only in the kitchen > because the rest of the house is not livable. A subjective approach to medicine or health will not get us anywhere. The world (or at least a good part of it) is talking in here and elsewhere and we are all talking about a more or less global (rather than a personal) problem. > AF> And dowsing a house with water containing > AF> other agressive substances (i.e. drugs with side-effects) is > AF> certainly even more counterproductive in attempting to achieve > AF> such a goal. > Again, this is something the patient & the doctor must weigh the > advantages and disadvantages of to come to a morally satisfactory > decision. This is the situation as we now have it in the majority of cases. Individuals seeking (mostly through lack of knowledge except that they will only live to the age of around 80 at the most) a solution to their own personal health problem from someone else who is forced to prescribe treatments rather than advice on how the body can cure itself..and most are not even trained to even address this aspect...in order to make a living. > AF> Most people (and hence the researchers providing the > AF> pills to meet the demand) spend much more time on cleaning their > AF> outsides rather than their insides and place the responsibility > AF> for any ailments resulting from this approach in the hands of > AF> the docs (or even some ALTMED herbal brew) rather than accept > AF> the blame and the responsibility for the situation themselves. > You're making me nervous. I agree again. You may agree...but the problem was and still is that most people do not know, i.e. are purposely made blissfully unaware unless they make the effort to find out...most are not even aware that they need to find out...how to go about cleaning up their insides. > AF> Health is much more than the odd vitamin pill and a workout at the > AF> gym and eating less animal fats. It is highly dependent in my > AF> view (and not only mine) on us living and eating and moving > AF> as we used to do (i.e. before fire was discovered) and are hence > AF> programmed to do. In other words, living as closely as possible > AF> in our different environment to the way the wild animals still > AF> do and the way the wild animal "man" used to do. > You mean back when the life span was less than 15 years and the enamel > on our teeth lasted longer than we did? Get real! I would agree that > people had very few medical ailments back then. They ate much more > ruffage, but they also ate raw meat. This has not been proven. There are no records and no proof of what humans ate before fire was discovered (which in my view and the view of others started the downfall of man). If we really did eat raw meat (i.e. rather than the odd bugs on our veggies) then we would surely have been equipped with the speed, strength and the claws and even the long fangs and acidic saliva and instinct (etc. etc.) to both favour and secure a raw meat supply. Human protein is built from "essential" amino acids (i.e. those which the body can not produce itself). There are two posible sources of amino acids, i.e. neat in fruits and veggies or complicated (meaning that much digestive energy is needed) in the form of animal protein made up of amino acids which has to be broken down first (and is even damaged if cooked). > They were in very good shape > (they had to be, or die), but they spent all day, every day, looking > for food & better shelter. There is very little that can be adapted > from those days to today. Come forward to a more intelligent time, and > you end up with the Asian people who had the ability to live very well. > The doctors of their time practiced what we would consider to be > alternative medical treatments. They did not have any way to truely > research any type of ailment. It was trial-and-error. The interesting > thing about old medical treatments is that they used herbs & other > non-traditional (by today's standards) treatments. Listen, I agree > that health is much more than the odd vitamin pill, a workout at the > gym and eating less animal fats, but you seem to be leaving out so > many options. Those in this world who tend to be blessed with good health and longevity also tend to be hard-working (almost or complete) vegetarians. But even they must bow down to your very own Dr. Norman W. Walker, for example, who devoted at least the last two thirds of his life to cleaning up his insides, and died peacefully of old age at the extremely rare age of 116. You can't go wrong by reading some of his books...he wrote his last one at the tender age of 113!! To be continued...... Best regards, Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00091Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 01:47am \/To: ROYCE SHARP (Read 1 times) Subj: Rely 3 of 3 Hi Royce, > AF> All modern and > AF> even less modern successful approaches to prevention and cure > AF> (i.e. the body curing itself) would seem to bear this out as > AF> they always tend to take one or more of these aspects into > AF> consideration. > There are too many ailments the body can not effectivly "fix" without > some form of assistance. As long as you are talking about physical injuries rather than bacterial or viral infections I would agree. Good health can fix the rest...but only as long as dangerous medications such as antibiotics etc. as well as unnatural foodstuffs and a polluted environment have not barred the way to perfect or near-perfect health by weakening the immune system. > By the way, I too believe in the body curing > itself. However, if the body is unable to cure itself, and all of the > doctors have given up on curing you (or anyone), then what alternative > does a person have? An extremely subjective response (which is understandable as you probably have your wife in mind rather than mankind as a whole). You first have to ask yourself why most other creatures on this earth seem to have a way of curing themselves (and they tend to rely on instinct alone rather than any doc) and seem to die mostly a natural rather than an unnatural death. The one and only answer is that they are lving the life they are supposed to rather than a life built around conscious and unconscious personal preferences. Seeing as the only thing (as far as we are aware) that animals do that we also do is eat, drink, breathe, exercise and copulate, it is obvious that the clues to a better living on our part lie there rather than treating the symptoms (which often means repressing a natural body defecne mechanism) of some ailment which we should not really have in the first place. > You also seem to be leaving out the mind as being part of the body. > If a person damages a joint, say, the knee, and tells the doctors > they do not wish to use any drugs that are not completely understood, > the doctors will design a treatment system for the patient to follow. > If the patient is still suffering from pain, the patient would > (in most cases) ask the doctor what other options are available. > If the doctors tell the patient there is no proven or understood > system of treatment left, by your line of thinking, the person is > simply SOL. You did mention the use of pain killers until a cure is > found, but the person would have to deal with the side effects. If an > alternative treatment is attempted and is succesful in removing the > pain, I again ask, where is the problem. Even if the effect is only > psychosomatic, you end up with your mind fooling you instead of you > fooling your mind. The patient is now functional. If the patient > goes out and injures the knee again, then you are dealing with > stupidity and that is where I have very little sympathy. A swollen joint is a body reaction and part of the natural healing process. The body swells a joint to immobilise it in order to be able to heal it before further (often irreparable such as with osteoarthritis, for example) damage is done. The same thing applies to a fever. So do you really believe that artificially suppressing a body defense mechanism such as a swelling or a fever is the answer? > Again, where is there anything wrong with this? That is the biggest > question you were never able to successfully answer. I certainly did answer it...but whether I was successful this time or last time is up to you to decide. > I truely wish you well and hope you never end up with a chronic > ailment. I have had many chronic ailments in my lifetime Royce (at least until I started looking for and slowly finding answers). At the moment I have none and am perfectly aware that any I may get in the future are my fault rather than the fault of either the medical or food industries (environmental pollution is also a possible cause but...statistically...not such a serious one). IOW....just like the minority of people in this world ...I am at least prepared to take the blame for anything I may contract on my own shoulders (simply by eliminating as many of the other possible causes as I can with my current knowledge). Nobody is perfect...least of all me...but it is at least high time that people start putting the responsibility for their own health on their own shoulders (a trend which is most certainly increasing in Germany). Best regards, Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00092Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 02:01am \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Adhd Hi Jane, > AF> I can feel for you but there is no cure for osteo (what is gone is > AF> gone) only relief or an artificial joint. If you can get harmless > AF> relief (whereby I would claim that anything which kills pain is > AF> not harmless or without side-effects) then go ahead. I personally > AF> know of no cure for osteoarthritis. Even if bone begins to grow > AF> again it would seem that the bone (body) does not seem to remember > AF> the original form and this thus usually ends up in a deformation. > AF> In this respect I would certainly like to be proven wrong. > We shall soon see what the Glucosamine does. I will not have surgery. Personal experience is the best experience. Let us know how you progress. Just remember what I was implying when I said a few posts back that one can walk on one's own stubs by merely taking morphium. To my knowledge there is no cure for osteoarthritis and you are thus (IMOHO) faced with having to relieve the symptoms and remain mobile. > AF> > AF> Because you yourself are a sufferer it is understandable that ou > AF> > AF> place a greater accent on relief rather than on a cure..and even > AF> > AF> more understandable when an ailment such as osteoarthritis is ot > AF> > AF> curable. Nevertheless, this is not the way to go for the future, > AF> > AF> more effort (i.e. research funds) need to be pumped into > prevention > AF> > AF> and hence cure (prevention is the only cure) and thus into the > AF> > AF> causes of diseases and ailments. > Anything is curable if we understand it. Only the body can cure anything (and there is no medication known to mankind which can assist the body in this taskwithout producing serious side-effects). > That is the first step. The first step is to put more money into research on how to achieve health rather than in the mostly futile attempts to repair the damage caused by the way most of us live at present. Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00093Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 09:38pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Alcohol As An Alternative Hi Jane, > AF> It is almost impossible (unless you live out in the sticks) to get > AF> even a plot of land to build on over here for that price!! After > AF> buying that land a cheap house would cost at least another $300,000. > What is the average salary? Nobody really knows as not many (except civil servants and tariff workers) know how much their collegues earn. One has to sell oneself for what one thinks one is worth over here. > Or do several families live together in an apartment? At least half of the Germans live in rented property (i.e. a house or an apartment) but those who own houses tend to live alone with their families (sometimes renting out part of a large house to a student etc.). Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00094Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 09:40pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Alcoholism Hi Jane, > Alan, ever wonder just how many genetic alcoholics have some form of psi > power? > The answer is.......many. Now explain to us what psi power is and how it is measured. ;-) Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00095Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 09:46pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Arthritis Hi Jane, > AF> > AF> I have reached the conclusion that even today the allopathics > still > AF> > AF> have no idea at all what a detox is and how it should be done..and > AF> > AF> the reasons against doing it their way. The same applies to many > AF> > AF> so-called alternative nutrition groups (the most famous being he > AF> > AF> microbiotic crowd..who nearly killed themselves before realising > AF> > AF> the error of their ways). > I wrote: > AF> > It takes more than "Just say no". During the Reagan/Bush years, we > had > AF> > a trumped up excuse to remove tryptophan from the market at the same > AF> > time that North, Poindexter, and Co. were flying cocaine in here rom > AF> > Central America. (Dateline just had a TV special on this for any > AF> > readers who want to fight about this subject, complete with maps and > the > AF> > California location involved.) > And this: > AF> > Tryptophan makes it easier for addicts to stay off cocaine during > AF> > withdrawal. > AF> I don't see the connection with my paragraph which you quoted (??) > You seem to have a problem with comprehension of American. You did say > that you were raised with English, did you not? I was talking about > detox and so were you. I was not talking about the detox of addictive drugs and the inevitable acompanying withdrawal symptoms but the detoxification of the body from unwanted substances taken in with food and air and often stored for safekeeping in fat if they can not be released shortly afterwards. You don't seem to understand English at all when I repeatedly tell you that I do not wish to discuss alcohol or drug addiction (i.e. purposely self-inflicted injuries). Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00096Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 10:00pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Asthma' Contrib [1/2] Hi Jane, > AF> > AF> It would certainly seem that asthma is a nervous complaint in he > AF> > AF> first instance..and that both family circumstances and even > hormonal > AF> > AF> imbalances can play a role here. > AF> > Only to someone with your data base, Alan. > AF> Not from the databases Jane...but from Bruker..who is curing asthma > AF> patients (i.e. rather than treating them). ;-) > If he is treating them for nervous problems, then he is not getting very > far. Where is your comprehension of English? Did I say up there that nervous problems are said to be the ONLY cause. Actually Bruker is considered one of the leading experts on nutrition-based ailments in Germany and the study of his literature is demanded by every university which teaches nutrition. Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 257 ALTERN. MEDICINE Ref: EBC00097Date: 07/03/97 From: ALAN FLETCHER Time: 10:01pm \/To: JANE KELLEY (Read 1 times) Subj: Cancer Hi Jane, > AF> > So is the incidence of new viruses such as the Ebola, Alan. > AF> > How do you explain that? > AF> Whereas it is common knowledge that the excessive use of antibiotics > AF> has increased the evolution rate of bacteria (and hence the speed > AF> of acquired immunity to antibiotics), this does not appear to be > AF> the case with Ebola. It is known to be a disease which "sometimes" > AF> affects and decimates chimpanzee populations (Jane Goodall) even > AF> though the source is still not known. It is also known that the > AF> disease only broke out in a population which is known to eat > AF> chimps as an (unnatural) food source. Knowledge to date would > AF> thus indicate that it is unnatural and even downright dangerous > AF> for humans to eat chimps. > I would say that you don't have the first clue. And I would reply that you have never taken the trouble to study even one iota of info on this subject. Alan --- GEcho 1.00 * Origin: The Bear's Cave (2:2461/161.5)