Let's Get Our Terms Defined
This book is not anti-MD. Medical doctors receive a fine education. But they are, in this country, indoctrinated into Allopathy, the use of pharmaceuticals that are suppressive. Suppressive pharmaceuticals are Allopathic in nature, they go against the dis-ease. Homeopathic pharmaceuticals, herbal and nutritional pharmaceuticals, go with the dis-ease.
To be a Homeopath in France one must first become an MD, and then specialize for two years in Homeopathy. Argentina has 8000 MD Homeopaths, Brazil has 14,000!! Most Homeopaths in Europe are MDs. The U.S. has maybe 300 MD Homeopaths. So you see, an MD can be a Homeopath. 99% of MDs practice Allopathy, however.
When this book refers to an Allopath it means a practitioner who uses suppressive pharmaceuticals in their practice. This can include Naturopaths, Medical doctors and Osteopaths as well as Nurse Practitioners. Some graduates of colleges teaching Allopathy as the sole method of treatment use both Allopathic pharmaceuticals and Homeopathic pharmaceuticals in their practices. In the U.S., one has to be licensed as an MD or a DO (doctor of osteopathy), a Naturopath or Nurse Practioner in order to prescribe suppressive substances, Allopathic prescription drugs. They call it the right to prescribe. Hospitals like to use the terminology of having hospital privileges, meaning the MD or DO has the right to see their patients in a hospital. These are terms of control and infer domination, superiority and a superior education. They are really terms that promote exclusivity and monopoly, all of which enhance income for the pharmaceutical manufacturers…a corporate entity, not a board of concerned individuals who are concerned about the nation's health. Regarding health care, in the U.S., no one is watching the store, except the sellers.
Most of the substances sold in a regular American pharmacy are suppressive. There are, conversely, pharmaceuticals that are in the category of 'replacement therapy substances.' These are not suppressive. For example, if someone takes hormones, these hormones do not suppress a dis-ease but, in replacing what the body is supposed to be making itself, the body is encouraged to not make that hormone anymore. This is negative feedback. Examples of replacement therapy substances are hormones and neurotransmitters. The prescribing of these substances encourages the non-production of these substances by the body, which is what the body used to do before the 'hormone imbalance' or 'chemical imbalance' in the brain began. Of course, if one has had their thyroid removed, taking thyroid hormones is a must. But if the thyroid is in a state of under production, as in hypothyroidism, instead of supplying hormones from the outside in the form of pills, the thyroid should be given the nutrients it needs to make its own hormones. This is nutritional or herbal therapy. Precursors (the building blocks) for these hormones can be taken too, encouraging the production of the needed hormone.
Did you know that after you take aspirin for a headache that the headache is still there? All that the aspirin has done is deaden the nerve transmitting the pain signal. Repeated use of analgesics encourages one to ignore the cause of the pain.
Homeopathic pharmaceuticals are often simply called remedies, medicines, or drugs. A medicine of any sort may be called a drug. The word drug was used in the older days of Homeopathy to denote Homeopathic remedies. There is a voluminous book by an MD-Homeopath named Tyler called 'Homeopathic Drug Pictures'.
Emergency medicine is not Allopathic. It is the use of surgery and life saving techniques, such as fluid replenishment, re-starting the heart, bone splinting, sewing knife wounds and removing bullets, etc. to save a life. Emergency medicine is not the use of Allopathic substances to suppress a condition and make the symptoms appear to go away. Instead, it involves doing whatever is necessary to continue life. It is often referred to as modern medicine but should not be confused with Allopathy. Emergency medicine is practiced in Homeopathic hospitals in India on a daily basis and is far from being suppressive. Emergency medicine is not limited to MDs and is practiced in acupuncture clinics/hospitals in Asia and in Homeopathic clinics/hospitals in South America, Mexico and Europe.
In the U.S. the pharmaceutical conglomerates have fostered a mixing of the terms. Those terms are modern medicine, emergency room treatment, surgery and the use of pharmaceutical suppressive substances. It is all called Medicine! But there are many branches of medicine: Chiropractic, Homeopathic, Naturopathic, Acupuncture, Herbology, Nutrition, Psychology and Body Work. Actually, the word medicine should be reserved for substances that heal. Clearly, a substance that does not heal but merely makes a symptom appear to disappear should not be considered a medicine. Because of this confusion, when I use the word medicine here I will add what type of medicine I am talking about. I will also say Allopath when referring to a practitioner using suppressive substances. I will also not use the word doctor to mean an MD or DO. A doctor is one who heals. I believe Allopaths want to heal and that they hope they are healing, that they even believe they are healing, but I do not believe suppressive pharmaceuticals can heal. They treat the patient but are, by nature, not healing, since they suppress. Another way to look at this is to say that Homeopaths don't really heal either; the Homeopathic medicines do the healing! This keeps the Homeopath humble!
When I use the word doctor I will qualify the term saying which type of doctor I am referring to. When I use the initials MD I am referring to a practitioner who has the license of MD. Many MDs are Homeopaths. The term DC means Doctor of Chiropractic and means that practitioner has that license. The same applies to an ND (Naturopathic doctor) or NMD (doctor of Naturopathic medicine) and connotes that they have that license. In order to know which modalities of care a practitioner performs it is best to mention the modality instead of the licensure, or both. For example: a Chiropractic Homeopath, a Homeopathic Naturopath, a Nutritional MD, a Homeopathic DO, a Nutritional Chiropractic Physician. Then you know the modality and the licensure. But if I say, 'a Homeopath gave the patient…' then, for me, Homeopathy was performed. The licensure of the Homeopath means little, compared to the modality utilized.
Licensure has become the means whereby patients come to have confidence in training. But it says little compared to the importance of the modality used. Suppressive pharmaceuticals can be bought over the counter in Mexico…in the U.S. it is considered a right. The 'Codex' movement is trying to legislate that all nutrients become prescription substances in the U.S., meaning that only licensed MD's, DO's and Nurse practitioners would have the right to prescribe them. What a disaster that would be…my point being that licensure does not insure confidence as much as the safety inherent in the modality. When was the last time you met a person who had a side effect of vitamin A? Or had trouble driving under the influence of the herb chamomile or a Homeopathic remedy?
It is not correct to say, "I went to my Chiropractor, Naturopath, Acupuncturist, Homeopath or Nutritionist, and then I went to see my 'doctor'. They are all doctors even though different states may legislate who gets to be called 'doctor'. But in reality, and for the purposes of this book, a 'doctor' is a person that heals and does NOT give suppressive substances.
If you undertake working with a practitioner who uses Homeopathy, Nutrition, Chiropractic, Naturopathy and/or Acupunture, you may wish to change your terminology. Often people tell me, "now that I am considering reducing some of my medications and am working with you, what do I tell my doctor?" This shows me that the patient's allegiance is with Allopathy. After all, when the patient says such a statement to me, the practitioner they are talking to is a doctor. Remember, a doctor is a person who heals. (For example: giving a statin drug, an anti-cholesterol pharmaceutical, makes the cholesterol appear lower in the blood. It actually is made to lower, but is that what you really want? Cholesterol is the slipperiest known substance known to man. Blood cells have to squeeze through tiny capillaries, exchanging oxygen and carbon dioxide. Serum, the clear portion of the blood, is delivering nutrients, vitamins and minerals, and is picking up toxic waste from cells within the capillaries. Wouldn't you want that solution to be as slippery as possible, given there are billions of these narrow capillaries in the body?)
It is more accurate to say, "now that I am treating with a Homeopath etc. what should I tell my Allopath?" This will show the practitioner before you that you understand a lot about the system of medicine we live in, that your allegiance is to health, and not to an individual whom our society has given nearly God status. This is not a personal vendetta on my behalf. Attorneys, hired by non-Allopathic boards to defend the rights of non-Allopathic practitioners, use the correct terminology in their proceedings; otherwise they would give away their power simply by using terms that give away status and power.
The term 'Western Medicine' is also a misnomer. It delineates western from eastern medicine…occidental from oriental. The sciences of Acupuncture, Acupressure and five-element theory originate in Asia. Herbology is arguably from Asia and Africa and has probably been used everywhere…amongst people of the Middle East and North and South American Indigenous people. Ayurvedic medicine is clearly of East Indian descent. But Homeopathy is certainly a European science, originating in German and branching outward from there. Chiropractic is uniquely from the U.S. Modern day nutrition is European, Australian and from the U.S. Naturopathy as a licensure originated in the U.S. Allopathy originated in Europe. When caustic substances began to be of use in Europe, nowhere else in the world was such treatment being used. Modern day Allopathy admits to the barbaric practices of those times. So, the word 'western' doesn't make much sense unless one is intending to make it clear that they are meaning non-Asian modalities.
Another interesting term widely used these days is orthomolecular. It refers to the type of Nutrition that Allopaths, who have switched over to Nutrition, tend to practice. It usually includes what Whole-Food Nutritionists call 'mega doses', very high doses of nutrients. They also almost always use what are referred to as 'isolates'. Meaning the nutrient, such as vitamin A, for example, has been either synthesized or extracted (isolated) from its original source. Whole-Food Nutritionists do not approve of using these substances and several studies in Scandinavian countries have shown, with large groups of volunteers, that isolated vitamins are actually cancer producing! More on this in the chapter on Nutrition. Beware that Nutrition can be practiced Allopathically. If the Nutritionist's end result is to suppress an ailment then the treatment is by nature Allopathic!
'Integrative' is another oft used term in Europe and the U.S. It refers to working with what they call 'western medicine' and 'alternative medicine' in an integrated fashion. It suggests that the Allopath will combine Nutrition with pharmacology, choosing the best of both worlds. But to support with Nutrition and suppress with Allopathy is antithetical by nature. Are you really getting the best of both worlds?
'Preventive' is another popular term and suggests the practitioners respect the process of taking care of conditions before they require Allopathy or surgery. It is a noble end for all branches of medicine.
The term 'physician,' I believe, should be reserved for practitioners who are not only healers but to those who have committed themselves to an extensive education of six to eleven years post high school. The right to use the word 'physician' legally is a legislative matter that differs from state to state and is highly coveted.
Another word I will use differently in this writing than what is normally understood by the word is 'dis-ease.' 'Dis-ease,' for many, implies there is something that has entered the body. But look at Alzheimer's, for example. It is a functional disorder that is the result of many small bad decisions in diet, the absence of supplementation, perhaps vaccinations, too many allopathic pharmaceuticals etc. It is not an organism or virus that has entered the body. Beware, though, that often when a bacteria or virus is found in the body, that the bacteria or virus' are not the cause of the problem but rather are opportunistic…taking advantage of the pathology at the sight of the ailment. Once a pharmaceutical is discovered that will destroy the bacteria or virus', tests will be expedited, as the FDA has an accelerated program, the media will be notified and sales of the pharmaceutical will begin.
When an ailment is called a 'dis-ease' it also implies, that somebody, at least, knows what it is. Medical pathology books have a section titled 'Etiology' under each ailment…it usually is a very short section…it says 'unknown' for almost every ailment! I will use the word 'disease' for when an etiology is known and the word 'dis-ease' or 'ailment' when it is unknown.