⊙ Timeless Secrets of Health & ReJuvenation <15> What Doctors Should Be Telling You

CHAPTER 15

 

What Doctors Should Be Telling You…

1. Potential Dangers of Medical Diagnosis

he categorization of disease begins with its diagnosis. Depending on the particular symptom of

discomfort or pain a person may be experiencing, a visit to the doctor will most likely result in the

diagnosis of a disease, which the physician knows by its name and description. However, before you are

given the certainty of diagnosis, you may have to undergo a series of routine examinations. There is the

stethoscope, which has become a symbol of the healing profession; a measuring device to take the blood

pressure; counting of the heart beat through feeling of the pulse; blood and urine tests; maybe X-rays,

EEG, EKG, and more… In total, there are over 1,400 test procedures available that the modern doctor can

use today to monitor and measure virtually every bit of your body.

Although in some cases, the use of these methods of diagnosis is justified and can save a person’s life,

in the vast majority of cases it is unjustified, misleading, and potentially harmful. In theory, high tech

diagnostic tools seem to be impartial and yield correct results, but in reality, they are grossly unreliable

and can be as dangerous to health as some of the riskiest drugs and surgical procedures. It is therefore

important that they are not applied routinely, but much more selectively and if possible, only during

emergency situations. The following are some of the most commonly used methods of diagnosis and their

discrepancies.

T

427

ECG and EEG – Machines can Lie

One of the instruments most frequently used to monitor heart activities is the Electrocardiogram or

ECG/EKG. Repeatedly conducted tests have shown that at least 20 percent of diagnoses made by

ECG/EKG experts were false. In addition, 20 percent of all ECG/EKG readings turned out to be different

when the same person was tested a second time. When ECG/EKG measurements were taken of people

who had suffered a heart attack, the machine could detect an abnormal heart function in only one quarter

of the patients, no sign of a heart attack in the second quarter, and indecisive results in one half of all

patients. A sudden “abnormal” curve in the ECG/EKG reading, caused by a jet flying over the hospital,

can put a person into the “risk” of suffering a possible heart attack.

One 1992 report published in the New England Journal of Medicine proved that ECG/EKG’s couldn’t

be trusted. When ECG/EKG’s were taken on a group of perfectly healthy people, over 50 percent of them

showed an extremely abnormal heart condition. In other words, if a healthy child or an adult goes through

a highly recommended health check-up and is diagnosed by an ECG/EKG expert as having an abnormally

behaving heart that requires urgent treatment, the chances of the diagnosis being false-positive are

fifty/fifty. To avoid being treated unnecessarily with potentially harmful drugs, it is necessary that

additional methods of diagnosis be employed to verify the correctness of the ECG/EKG readings. It is

also highly recommended to have a second or third ECG/EKG reading at another hospital, just to be on

the safe side.

The Electroencephalogram (EEG), which is used to measure brain activity and detect brain tumors and

epilepsy, often gives highly unreliable diagnostic results, too. Twenty percent of people who suffer from

epileptic seizures produce normal readings. What is even worse, 15-20 percent of healthy people produce

an abnormal EEG. To show how unreliable the EEG machine can be, when once connected to the head of

a doll it showed that the doll was alive. In order to avoid costly and potentially risky treatment programs,

one should not solely rely on the diagnosis produced by the EEG.

X-rays – Handle with Care!

One of the riskiest of all diagnostic tools is the x-ray machine. Most people who visit a doctor will

experience at least one exposure to the high-frequency waves of ionizing radiation (X-rays). These are the

facts that have so far been discovered about the adverse effects of X-rays:

? If children are exposed to X-rays while in the mother’s womb (in utero) their risk of all cancers

is increased by 40 percent, of tumors of the nervous system by 50 percent, and of leukemias by

70 percent.

? Today there are thousands of people with damaged thyroid glands, many of them with cancer,

who had been radiated with X-rays on head, neck, shoulder, or upper chest 20-30 years ago.

? Ten x-ray shots at the dentist are sufficient to produce cancer of the thyroid.

? Multiple X-rays have been linked with multiple myeloma – a form of bone marrow cancer.

? Scientists have told the American Congress that X-radiation of the lower abdominal region puts

a person into the risk of developing genetic damage that can be passed on to the next generation.

They also linked the “typical diseases of aging” such as diabetes, high blood pressure, coronary

heart disease, strokes, and cataracts with previous exposure to X-rays.

? It is estimated that at least 4,000 Americans die each year from x-ray related illnesses.

428

? In the UK, one fifth to one half of all X-rays given to patients are without real necessity. In the

US, the FDA reports that a third of all radiation is unnecessary.

? In the UK, X-rays ordered by doctors account for over 90 percent of the total radiation exposure

of the population (Cambridge University Press, 1993).

? In Canada, almost everyone gets an annual x-ray of one sort.

? Old X-ray equipment still used in many hospitals gives off 20 to 30 times higher doses of

radiation than is necessary for diagnostic purposes.

Unless it is for an emergency situation, X-rays should be avoided because their harmful side effects

may pose a greater health risk than does the original problem itself. As a patient you have the right to

refuse x-ray diagnosis. By discussing your specific health problem with your physician you can find out

whether taking X-rays is really necessary or not. Many physicians today share this concern with their

patients and try to find other ways to determine their exact condition.

Mammography – Yes or No?

A recent study showed that mammography – a diagnostic tool using X-rays to detect breast cancer in

women – is highly inaccurate. only between 1 and 10 out of 100 “positive” mammography tests are truly

positive, which means that there is a 90% - 99% chance that a woman is diagnosed with breast cancer but

doesn’t have it. Since these tests are not only taken once in a lifetime, the chances of becoming a victim of

false diagnosis for breast cancer are very high.

In Great Britain, there are about 100,000 women a year who receive a false diagnosis for breast

cancer. The women undergo many unnecessary biopsies and an unknown number of mastectomies (breast

amputations). Many of the women suffer unnecessarily from depression, desperation, and fear of dying as

a result of the diagnosis. In the United States, mastectomies have rocketed since mammography became

the most popular “preventive” method for diagnosing breast cancer.

To see mammography as a diagnostic tool for detecting pre-symptomatic stages of cancer is dubious.

In most cases of breast cancer, it is irrelevant whether breast cancer is detected at an early or late stage. It

is rather the type of cancer and whether it tends to metastasize (spread to other parts of the body) at an

early stage or not, that determines the outcome of the disease. Also with many mammograms performed,

a woman may put herself into the risk of developing the very disease mammography is supposed to

prevent, or worsen it if it is already present. Mammograms certainly aren't the “magic bullet” for breast

cancer prevention that everyone says. For one thing, mammograms are of very limited effectiveness

because they seem only to be able to detect tumors of a size that's large enough to signify a rather

advanced stage of cancer.

What is most disturbing about this diagnostic method is the excessive compression of the breast

during a routine mammogram. If there is a tumor in the breast, performing a mammogram can actually

break apart cancerous cell masses and cause the disease to spread to other organs. Forcible flattening of a

breast during a mammogram cannot be considered an acceptable risk, especially when the test is so

ineffective anyway. A large body of research suggests that mammograms may be only marginally more

effective (if at all) than physical exams in detecting breast cancer. So why use a method that can

exacerbate a disease unnecessarily? Mammography is a major-league moneymaker for hospitals, doctors,

and cancer clinics nationwide. The unsuspecting women believe the screening reduces their risk of death

from breast cancer by 50-75 percent! In truth, according to research conducted by the US Preventative

429

Task Force, it would be necessary to screen over 1200 women aged 40-74 every year for 14 years to

prevent even one death from breast cancer.

Fortunately for women, the massive increase in lawsuits as a result of missed tumors is contributing to

the increasing reluctance among doctors and clinics that once offered mammogram services to continue

doing so.

A 1997 report by the American National Cancer Institute stated that mammograms showed no

mortality benefit unless women in their 40s had been followed for 10 years. Despite the fact that over 90

percent of the abnormalities discovered by mammography are known to be benign (not cancerous), still 63

percent of U.S. women in their 40s have had a mammogram in the last two years.

Prevention of breast cancer does not begin with having a mammography; it starts with taking active

responsibility for one’s body and mind. It can be said that all things that occur naturally have a cancer

preventive effect and this includes food. Commenting on a recently released study on prevention of cancer,

John Pezzuto, leader of a food research group at the University of Illinois at Chicago, USA, said: “…the

study does show that a diet loaded with fruits and vegetables is a good defense against cancer.” Research

has identified a substance in grapes called resveratol that has proven to help cells from turning cancerous

and inhibit the spread of cells that are malignant already. Most other natural foods contain similar or even

more powerful substances.

Women don’t need to rely on the mammography test to feel safeguarded against breast cancer,

especially since it is highly unreliable as a diagnostic tool. A series of liver, kidney and colon cleanses are

often enough to prevent, stop and regress any type of cancer.

Hair dyes (highlights are OK), make-up, chemical deodorants, chemical toothpaste, commercial

synthetic shampoos, etc., all release large amounts of chemical toxins into the lymph ducts of the breasts,

causing lymphatic congestion and high levels of toxicity there. Wearing bras regularly also impairs proper

lymph flow and may greatly increase the chance of breast cancer.

A Note on the Dangers of Breast Implants

Over 300,000 women a year get breast implants. Having breast implants and having mammograms can

endanger your health. I have been receiving multiple letters from women who have or had silicone breast

implants that ruptured because of it. one woman had this to say: “… I have had them for 23 years with no

problems. Then they started to leak. The way I knew was I had pain in my chest and numbness and

tingling down my arms. I got them out as quickly as possible and did not replace them. The doctor told

me that it was a bad rupture and I had silicone in my lymph nodes and chest, and he could only clean up

so much of it because it is like glue. There are many other ingredients in the implants (listed below);

heavy metals such as aluminum and platinum are used as catalysts in turning the liquid silicone to gel.

Silica is used as a filler; it is deadly if it gets into the lungs.

? cyclobexanone

? isopropyl alcohol

? denatured alcohol

? acetone

? urethane

? polyvinyl chloride

? lacquer thinner

? ethyl acetate

? epoxy resin

? epoxy hardner

? amine

? printing ink

? toluene

? freon

? silicone

? flux

430

? solder

? metal cleaning acid

? formaldehyde

? talcum powder

? color pigments

? oakite (cleaning solvent)

? cyanoacyrylates

? ethylene oxide

? carbob black

? xylene

? hexone

? hexone 2

? thixon-OSN-2

? rubber

? acid atrearic

? zinc oxide

? naptha (rubber solvent)

? phenol

? methylene chloride

? benzene

If you are concerned about getting breast cancer, it is best to avoid anything that is as unnatural as the

above factors. Women can actively contribute to a carefree future by taking care of their bodies’ daily

needs and requirements (also see “Cancer –Who Makes It, Chapter 10). .

Medical Laboratories are Unreliable

Some of the weakest points in the field of medical diagnosis concern the bacteriological tests

conducted in medical laboratories. In 1975, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States

released the findings of an investigation of medical laboratories throughout the country and published the

following results:

• 10-15 percent of the bacteriological tests were insufficient.

• 30-35 percent of the simplest clinical tests turned out to be outright false.

• 12-18 percent of tests determining the correct blood groups and blood types, and 20-30 percent of

tests determining the blood serum and hemoglobin levels were sloppy.

• Over one quarter of all tests showed faulty results.

• 31 percent of the laboratories were not even capable of detecting a simple form of anemia.

• Other laboratories falsely found infectious mononucleosis (glandular fever) in one out of every

three tested persons. Between 10 and 20 percent of the laboratories detected Leukemia (blood

cancer) in samples that were free of it.

Another countrywide American study showed that over 50 percent of the laboratories with “high

standards” and permission to conduct all the different types of medical work did not fulfill national

requirements. The worst results surfaced during a study when 197 out of 200 tested persons with

abnormal test results turned out to be completely healthy after they were tested a second time! It may be

added that the CDC is observing only the best laboratories, which make up less than ten percent of the

total number of medical labs in the whole of the United States.

In 1989, an editorial in the Lancet bluntly announced that many routine laboratory diagnostic tests are

a waste of time and money. one study showed that the diseases of only six out of 630 patients were

diagnosed from routine blood and urine tests. In another major study involving 1,000 patients only 1

percent benefited from routine blood and urine tests.

431

Sarah is in her late 30s and has been having some gastrological problems. Her doctor referred her to a

specialist whom he described as “widely recommended.” He examined her and ran some tests including

the fecal occult blood test (FOBT). Surprised when one of the tests came back positive, this doctor

recommended a colonoscopy. He also assured Sarah there is no risk to the procedure.

In recent years, colonoscopy has become the standard procedure for detecting cancer or precancerous

polyps in the colon. Colonoscopy is an invasive procedure, requiring sedation while a flexible, tubular

instrument is inserted into the colon.

When Sarah asked her doctor whether the test result could be flawed, he told her that there can be a

number of reasons an FOBT sometimes brings back false positive results. In order to get second opinion

and clear her doubts about possibly having a colonoscopy unnecessarily, Sarah asked her doctor to refer

her to another gastrologist. After scheduling a new FOBT, here doctor handed her a list of things she

needed to avoid for three to five days before the test in order to prevent a false positive result. These

included:

• Eating red meat, fish, broccoli, potatoes, mushrooms, cantaloupe, grapefruit, carrots, cabbage,

cauliflower, radishes, Jerusalem artichokes and turnips

• Eating iron-rich foods or taking iron supplements

• Taking acetaminophen or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as aspirin or

ibuprofen

• Supplements of 200 mg or more of vitamin C

As it turned out, Sarah had eaten some of the foods on the list, plus she has taken Vitamin C at a six times

higher dose than permitted for this test.

The main question that arises from this is case “how many people undergoing FOBT tests are not

receiving receive this list by their doctor, and subsequently end up having a false positive test result which

makes them a candidate for colonoscopy?

Hypertension Produced in the Doctor’s Office?

If your visit to the doctor is accompanied by the fear of anticipating a serious physical problem, your

anxiety may trigger a stress response and raise your blood pressure. This phenomenon is known as

“white-coat hypertension.” While the doctor is measuring your blood pressure (using the old system of

measurement), the pressure of the inflating cuff against your blood vessels and accompanying nerves

raises it even more. By the time the pressure in the cuff is lowered to read the pulsation level, you

inevitably have an artificially raised blood pressure. Both factors, the anxiety and the taking of the blood

pressure, may be sufficient to “make” a person hypertensive.

A healthy blood pressure can vary tremendously – as much as 30 mm Hg – over the cause of any day.

To be really certain that you are hypertensive, the doctor would either have to take several readings each

day over a period of six months (as recommended by the WHO) or give you a portable electronic device

to do the same. Another problem arises because the systolic blood pressure may vary between each arm

by as much as 8 mm Hg. In some cases the difference can be up to 20 mm Hg.

Also, there is the question of whether the doctor or health care worker takes the blood pressure while

the person is lying down, then sitting, and then standing. If the person is asked to stand, how long does the

doctor wait before taking the blood pressure? And, is he checking the person’s heart rate in the three

432

different positions? Just taking a blood pressure when the person is sitting will not tell him much about

what happens when he is standing for any amount of time. But who is the patient that asks his doctor to

do all that? The general mode of behavior in a doctor’s office is to let the doctor do his job without

questioning him. A recent study revealed that more than 70 percent of health care workers failed to use

the proper arm position established by the American Heart Association. This position calls for the elbow

to be slightly flexed and held at heart level.

In a study from the University of California, San Diego, 100 subjects were given six blood pressure

readings in different positions. The researchers found that when subjects were seated with the arm

perpendicular to the body, hypertension was recorded in 22 percent. But when the same subjects held the

arm parallel to the body, 41 percent showed BP readings indicating high blood pressure. This raises a very

important question: “How many people leave the doctor’s office or hospital with a blood pressure

prescription in hand who ‘suffer’ from high blood pressure because the doctor or nurse didn’t follow the

proper measurement guidelines?” My conservative estimate is, hundreds of thousands of them.

With regard to testing the blood pressure in pregnant women, there is no consensus as yet on which of

the several available tests are truly reliable.

Furthermore, high blood pressure often is a temporary stress-related phenomenon and returns to

normal after things calm down. In the case of white-coat hypertension, your blood pressure may drop to

normal levels soon after you leave the doctor’s office. But whether your blood pressure is chronically

elevated or not, you may be asked to take anti-hypertensive drugs that have little or no effect on your real

condition, but may produce severe side effects including headaches, lethargy, nausea, sleepiness, and

impotence. Anti-hypertensive drugs are so popular today because patients believe that just by swallowing

a pill a day they can prevent a possible heart attack. Research published in 1997 by the Journal of the

American Medical Association found that drugs for high blood pressure may be over-prescribed,

especially if blood pressure measurements are taken by the doctor instead of by the portable device used

for ambulatory monitoring.

Breeding Hypertensive Patients

What is more disturbing is that the medical system is trying to create a problem where there is none.

What is considered to be “normal” blood pressure has been modified nearly a dozen times in the past 30

years. The American Medical Association’s recommendations now cite anything over 115/70 as being

“high.” Just 6 years ago, that number was 140/90, which is actually still quite low. Perhaps, soon

everyone with 100/60 may be considered at risk. How far do they want to take this deception before

everyone is declared as being in the risk group for high blood pressure?

We are certainly heading in the wrong direction with our medication policies in the U.S. and other

countries. We have indiscriminately turned huge portions of the population into hypertensive patients that

in actual fact are not sick at all. According to a recent Reuters online article, a Ben Gurion University

study with 500 subjects showed that patients over 70 years old with what modern standards call “mild

hypertension” actually thought more clearly and creatively than those with lower blood pressure. Both

men and women in the study whose blood pressure was deemed high enough to warrant treatment with

prescription drugs – and also those with clinically uncontrolled (untreated) hypertension – performed

significantly better on tests of cognitive function, memory, concentration, and visual retention.

Surprisingly, those with “normal” blood pressure showed the worst performance among all three groups

in the study. The research clearly implies over-medication of senior citizens and not just for blood

433

pressure. Just as we have seen with blood cholesterol levels, a normal blood pressure among the elderly

population is naturally higher than it is for the younger population. Suppressing their blood pressure down

with side-effect causing drugs is not only harmful to their brain cells and other parts of the body, but it is

highly unethical, too. Andreas, there was a duplicate paragraph.

While research has established that mortality rates remain uninfluenced by the drugs, their side effects

are often severe and include collapse of the lungs and heart attacks. By contrast, there are many controlled

studies that show that relaxation therapies, and a change of diet and lifestyle can lower a person’s blood

pressure faster and more consistently than medication. Going on a balanced vegetarian diet alone can

normalize blood pressure on a permanent basis. The water therapy described earlier on is also a natural

and quick method to restore normal blood pressure. Furthermore, the daily full body oil massage

(especially with sesame oil) greatly benefits blood pressure. Also if taken internally as a cooking oil or

salad dressing, sesame oil helps reduce high blood pressure and dependence on medication. According to

a recent study, participants (average age 58 years) consumed 35 grams of sesame oil a day for 60 days and

thereby lowered their blood pressure readings from an average of 166/101 to 134/84.

All the other cleansing methods described in this book can significantly improve blood pressure, too.

In most cases, a series of liver cleanses and a kidney cleanse are sufficient to eliminate hypertension

altogether.

Conclusion:

I have used the examples of several diagnostic techniques to highlight the potential disadvantages and

dangers of just having a test. There are many other tests that are equally risky as the ones mentioned

above, including angiography, bone scans, CAT scans, MRI scans, oscopy, AFP, and of course smear

tests. The high percentage of false positive readings with these “objective” methods of diagnosis show

that diagnosis of disease is not as clear cut and obvious as it may seem to a layperson.

Today’s methods of clinical diagnosis for chronic problems are mostly symptom-oriented and,

therefore, leave the causes of the symptoms concealed and untreated. The cause-oriented diagnostic skills

of an experienced practitioner of natural medicine, on the other hand, may be able to reveal the true nature

of imbalance prevalent in the body of a chronically ill patient. The health practitioner would incorporate

in his treatment plan the elimination of the four major risk factors of disease as outlined in chapter 3.

However, in the case of an accident, an injury, burns, or other acute health problems, etc., there can

hardly be any better option than to place one’s life in the hands of an experienced practitioner of

conventional medicine.

2. Medical Treatment is Rarely Safe

“If all the medicine in the world were thrown into the sea, it would be bad for the fish and good for

humanity.” ~ O.W. Holmes, (Prof. of Med. Harvard University). In conventional medicine, the treatment

of disease is a highly controversial issue. on the one hand, many lives are saved through the procedures

and drugs used during medical intervention. on the other hand, harmful side effects arising from the

treatment can take lives.

434

When you visit a doctor and receive a prescription for a drug or procedure aimed at a specific

complaint you have, you (and your doctor) are most likely to presume that what he recommends has been

proved by extensive testing and scientific reviews. Yet it is a well documented and published fact that 85-

90% of all the medical treatments we generally trust and accept to be “scientifically verified” and “proven

effective,” have in actually been adopted and widely used without a single scientific study backing up

their claims.

Drugs Should be the Exception, not the Rule

In a 2004 article, Times talked about the “Pharmaceutical Man.” I sincerely doubt, though, that being

as drug-dependent as we are now could be considered to be an evolutionary step of the Homo Sapiens! It

can rather be seen as a sign of dissolution of life.

The illusion that there is a successful treatment for every disease has led to the escalation of

increasingly complex forms of illness and health care costs. Many patients who are released from

hospitals leave with the conviction that they are healed from whatever was wrong with them. They

believe that since the problem has been “fixed” they can just get on with their lives again. Drugs deceive

in this way.

When penicillin came on the market, it was considered to be a wonder drug that could bring dying

patients back to life within a few days. In fact, penicillin did save many lives, although simple methods of

cleansing and supporting the body in its effort to throw out poisonous substances could have achieved the

same. Today, penicillin causes the very same problems for which it is being prescribed. Side effects

include skin eruptions, diarrhea, fever, vomiting, mononucleosis, allergic shock, fainting, heart collapse,

arrhythmia, and low blood pressure.

Whatever applies to penicillin also applies to most other drugs. Their side effects often outweigh their

benefits and patients should be aware of the complications they may generate before they agree taking

them. The signs of this “evolution” abound. Nexium, Prevacid, Lipitor, Aspirin, Celebrex, Crestor and

other such pills have become household words. Neighbors, friends, relatives are all taking at least one pill

and more often several pills each day, for months and even years. Television, radio and print media are

full of praise for their “life enhancing” benefits. And newspapers go even one step further. Not a day

passes without an article or two heralding the latest study “demonstrating” the supposed benefits of the

wonder drugs.

In 2003 we spent $163 billion dollars on pharmaceutical drugs, which is more than we spend on fruits

and vegetables, all dairy products and all bakery products combined. So naturally, there are many more

pharmacies around than grocery stores! To sustain our health, we now rely more on pharmaceutical

products than on food. The pharmaceutical man has become a living reality.

There are now pills for every acute as well as chronic illness. As pleasing this should be to those

selling these pills, it doesn’t really make the people any healthier or happier. But this doesn’t stop the pill

producers from designing and manufacturing billions and billions of more pills, supposedly making your

life easier and more comfortable.

There are pills for when you or child’s attention wander from time to time. Now you can buy pills to

reduce or end pre- or post-menstrual pains and aches. If you have an unwanted pregnancy, there are pills

to induce an abortion. If you cannot curb your appetite, you can suppress it just by popping a pill. If you

complain to your doctor about not having an appetite, he can prescribe you a pill that can increase it for

you. There are pills for allergies and to attract the opposite sex. There are mood-enhancing pills and anti-

435

stress pills. Eventually, your dependency on pills will make you depressed. But, of course we have pills

for that, too. Taking antidepressants doesn’t really resolve a depression, though; in fact, we are now

finding that they can drive you into taking your own life.

If you search for it long enough (just use Google Search on the Internet), you can find a pill for every

physical and emotional difficulty you can think of.

Pill-Popper Drama Unfolding

“Medical practice has neither philosophy nor common sense to recommend it. In sickness the body is

already loaded with impurities. By taking drug-medicines more impurities are added, thereby the case is

further embarrassed and harder to cure.” ~ Elmer Lee, M.D., Past Vice President, Academy of Medicine.

The famous physician Dr. William Osler expressed the dilemma of taking medicinal drugs in just a

few simple words. “The person who takes medicine must recover twice, once from the disease and once

from the medicine.” Be careful to check for the side effects of the prescription medicines; they are always

listed on the instruction list accompanying the drug. But be also aware that many potential side-effects are

not listed, including death. only when serious side-effects get reported frequently by practicing

physicians may the FDA sometimes (when under public pressure) actually order the withdrawal of a drug.

A frequent side-effect of medical drugs that is hardly ever mentioned is the addiction to medical drugs.

The best-selling author of Confessions of a Medical Heretic, Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, said this: “We are

prone to thinking of drug abuse in terms of the male population and illicit drugs such as heroin, cocaine,

and marijuana. It may surprise you to learn that a greater problem exists with millions of men and women

dependent on legal prescription drugs.” Just because prescription medicine is legally available and given

to you by your doctor, it doesn’t mean it is less addictive than hallucinogenic drugs.

Elderly people should particularly be cautious when it comes to taking medicines prescribed by their

doctors. A new study from Duke University reveals disturbing evidence that more than 20 percent of all

seniors who are prescribed drugs are receiving medications that are known to be harmful to older patients.

Drugs can greatly interfere with the absorption of nutrients in everyone, and especially in the elderly.

For instance, acid blockers (such as Prilosec and Nexium) have been shown to significantly decrease

absorption of vitamin B-12, which is one of the primary vitamins needed to prevent anemia.

Other medications related to nutrient depletion are among the most frequently prescribed drugs on the

market. They include antibiotics, anti-depressants, anti-inflammatory drugs, blood pressure medications,

cholesterol-lowering drugs, estrogen, and tranquilizers. Any of these drugs can strip valuable vitamins and

minerals from the body. When two or more of these drugs are combined - especially in an older patient -

the risk of developing anemia rises almost exponentially. Anemia is a serious condition that can

dramatically increase mortality risk for patients with chronic health problems such as heart disease and

cancer.

The main problem is that the medical industry has managed to persuade the older generation that it

needs to take more drugs to stay healthy. And so the average senior now receives 25 prescriptions

annually! But the wider variety of drug intake increases the chances of serious drug interactions, while

further robbing the patients of the very nutrients they need most when fighting an illness. According to a

recent study, this situation has escalated into a very serious problem: 20% of all emergency department

visits are senior citizens suffering drug-related side effects or interactions. Another problem is overdosing

on the medications. one 2002 study identified 2.2 million cases of seniors taking more than the

recommended dosages of their medications. The only solution to this problem is assisting the elderly to

436

deal with the root causes of their health problems, rather than encouraging them to suppress the symptoms

of their ailments.

Doctor-caused Diseases Surging

Iatrogenesis (illness caused by the doctor) is one of the most rapidly spreading epidemics of our time.

Behind heart disease and cancer, medical doctors are the third-leading cause of death in the U.S. The

famous physician Charles E. Page, M.D. once stated: “The cause of most disease is in the poisonous drugs

physicians superstitiously give in order to affect a cure.” Medical intervention used for some of the most

benign conditions has created even life-threatening situations for many patients. And so the question

arises, what is more dangerous to your health, the disease or the treatment for the disease? The following

statistics released by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services may produce the answer.

In the United States there are 700,000 physicians. Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year are

120,000. The risk at dying at the hand of your doctor is therefore substantial. In a recent Harvard

University study researchers found that "long-shift" subjects committed five times as many diagnostic

errors as their shorter-shift counterparts. These weren't just errors in diagnosis. In one instance, a longshifter

ordered 10 times the correct dose of a powerful blood-pressure drug. Another error caused a

patient's lung to collapse when a sleepy intern botched inserting a tube into a nearby artery.

In yet another instance a tranquilizer overdose caused one patient to suffer a dangerously low heartbeat

and blood pressure. Hospitals have a real tight strategy for keeping costs down and making more profits.

So rather than paying additional doctors they just double-up the shifts of the least experienced staffers

they have (the study’s report cites an average 80-hour work week for interns).

Death Lurking in Prescription and Over-The-Counter Drugs

Then add the risk of dying from the side-effects of prescription and over-the-counter drugs (OTC).

According to a January, 2005 report, the dangerous arthritis drug Vioxx apparently has killed over

135,000 people. And consider the hundreds of OTCs, such as aspirin. This “harmless” drug increases the

risk of potentially lethal internal bleeding; it also makes blood more likely to clot up, not less!

And did you know that taking Ibuprofen (Advil, Motrin) in combination with aspirin actually doubles

your risk of death from heart-related causes! According to a study of medical records spanning eight years

from of over 7,000 patients if you take Ibuprofen for any reason - say, arthritis pain relief - while engaged

in aspirin therapy for heart disease, you're twice as likely to die from a heart attack because of the way

these two powerful drugs interact. The study which was conducted by Britain's Medical Research Council

and published in The Lancet). This proves the point that over-the-counter drugs can be lethal in the

stomach of an unsuspecting patient.

To stress the seriousness of the situation, a survey conducted by the National Consumers League found

that 44 percent of adults knowingly exceeded the recommended dose of OTC pain-relievers – while only

16 percent had even read the warning label! Federal officials estimate that over 150,000 Americans each

year end up in the emergency department because of complications from OTC pain-relievers. These

“harmless” medicines (if you can call it that) kill 16,000 Americans outright every year.

And while you may believe that aspirin is so good for getting rid of a headache,

a new study reveals that certain heart patients may actually be at greater risk of heart attacks if they use

aspirin, as reported in the July, 2004 issue of the American Heart Journal. The lead researcher of the study,

437

Dr. John G. F. Cleland, University of Hull, (Andreas, where is this university?)stated that any theoretical

benefit of using aspirin after a heart attack “is outweighed by real evidence of harm.” And a French study

showed how severe angina and fatal heart attacks might be prompted by the sudden halt of regular aspirin

intake. The researchers even stated that aspirin therapy “cannot be safely stopped in any case.

In stark contrast to drug therapy, a 15-month study of almost 2,000 subjects showed how those whose

diets included the highest fruit intake had more than 70 percent reduced risk of heart attack and other

cardiac problems compared with those who ate the least amount of fruit. And vegetable intake produced a

similar effect. Subjects who consumed vegetables three or more times each week had approximately 70

percent lower heart attack risk than those who ate no vegetables at all.

Antibiotics may have their place if someone is dying and could be saved by the drugs. But it is very

risky, for instance, to give children who are infected with the flu virus H the antibiotic Chloramphenicol.

The drug is known to destroy bone marrow, which requires subsequent blood transfusions and many other

therapies that cannot guarantee a recovery at all. Chloramphenicol preparations are still prescribed even

for such small problems as a sore throat.

According to studies cited by the American magazine Newsweek, seven out of ten Americans who

seek treatment for the simple cold receive antibiotics – even though it is a fact that antibiotics are useless

against viral infections such as the common cold or the flu. When these powerful yet ineffective drugs are

administered to patients with such relatively mild illnesses, neither patient nor doctor seems to be aware

of the “mess” the drugs can create in the body of an infected person. After killing most of the invading

germs and substantial numbers of friendly bacteria in the host’s intestines, the body’s immune system is

left with the nearly impossible task of removing their rotting carcasses. Since the good bacteria have been

destroyed too, there is “nobody” left to clear up this toxic mess, consisting in most part of putrefying

protein. Some of the protein, though, does end up in the connective tissues and is packed into the basal

membranes of the capillaries and arteries. In time, the increased congestion in the circulatory system may

lead to heart attacks, stroke, or congestive heart failure.

Nearly every day, drugs are removed from the market because they have shown to produce such

strong side effects that their use is “no longer” justified. Yet all drugs are potentially dangerous because

the poison they contain is “anti body” oriented, which means that they are also destroying parts of the

body.

The heart drug nifedipine, a calcium-channel blocker used to treat high blood pressure, has been linked

with serious (sometimes-fatal) side effects, including heart attacks and other cardiac abnormalities.

Although the Journal of the American Medical Association argues that because of its severe side effects

the drug should be abandoned, it is still prescribed world-wide in certain hypertensive emergencies. Also,

the US National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute has warned doctors to use nifedipine only with great

caution, if at all. one study published in 1995 in the Lancet found that patients who received calciumchannel

blockers were 60 percent more likely to suffer a heart attack than those put on either diuretics or

beta-blockers. Nifedipine turned out to be the most dangerous of all the calcium-channel blockers.

But beta-blockers are hazardous, too. In 1998, the Journal of the American Medical Association

reported that apart from not being effective, the elderly are more likely to suffer a sudden and fatal heart

attack while taking the drugs. New analysis of 10 trials from a Medline search revealed that beta-blockers,

which have been used for over 30 years to treat high blood pressure, are no more effective than a sugar

pill.

The American drug reserpin, which is also used to lower elevated blood pressure, has been shown to

increase the risk of breast cancer by 300 percent but is still given to patients with high blood pressure.

Several other classes of drugs -- including diuretics and antihypertensives (for lowering blood pressure) –

438

are suspected to cause cancer of the kidney. The beta-blocker atenol also became a suspect after it was

discovered that cancer was twice as common in hypertensive sufferers taking the therapy. Both British

studies and U.S. studies showed that only a fifth to a third of patients on drugs managed to reach blood

pressure targets set by their doctors. Even placebos are able to achieve that. This makes the so urgentlyadvised

treatment of high blood pressure more than questionable.

Another major side effect of hypertensive drugs is hypotension – or a sudden drop in blood pressure

when one stands up. The drugs are also the major cause of hip fractures among senior citizens. In 1994,

the British Medical Journal published a study showing that diuretics (drugs used to lower blood pressure)

cause an 11-fold increase in diabetes. As reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association in

1993, ACE inhibitors can cause potentially fatal kidney damage. They can cause death if they are given

too soon after a heart attack.

Even the highly praised “miracle” drug insulin, which is injected into diabetics, has now been proven

to cause diabetic blindness. Another drug is the anti-malaria drug plaquenil, which is also supposed to be

useful against lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and skin problems. Its sale is legal in the UK but prohibited in

the United States. The UK authorities have no objections to recommending the drug to children provided

the dose does not exceed 6.5 mg per kg of body weight a day. In the US, any doctor who prescribes

plaquenil to a child faces the risk of a lawsuit because a number of fatalities have been reported among

children who have taken doses as low as 0.75 g. But not only children risk their health and possibly their

lives by using the drug. Those suffering eye problems, psoriasis, or liver problems, and also alcoholics

and pregnant women could find their condition worsening. Side effects of the drug include irritability,

nervousness, nightmares, convulsions, nerve deafness, blurred vision, edema, bleaching of the hair,

alopecia, aplastic anemia, anorexia, and nausea.

Then there is a whole range of drugs out there that are designed to cut down your stomach acid

production. If you want to avoid developing pneumonia among other serious health problems, you better

stay away from antacids and instead deal with the true causes of acid reflux. Subduing the secretion of

stomach acid, through whatever approach, is a serious intervention with long-term consequences if

pursued over time. Undermining the stomach’s ability to commence a normal digestive process becomes

the genesis of an entire host of disorders.

According to a 2004 Dutch study published the Journal of the American Medical Association, several

popular heartburn medications may sharply increase the risk of pneumonia. The drugs involved are the

proton pump inhibitors: Nexium, Prilosec, Prevacid, Protonix, Aciphex, as well as the H2 receptor

antagonists Pepcid, Zantac, Tagamet, Rotane, and Axid.

Prozac Scandal Revealed; Antidepressants

The most favored antidepressant drug to make people “happy” is Prozac (fluoxetine). In the US, it is

now used by millions of people to cope with stressful living conditions. But the first studies on Prozac

showed that the drug is not harmless after all. Researchers from the University of California made the

discovery that women who take Prozac while pregnant are more than twice as likely to give birth to

babies with defects. If the drug is still taken at the third trimester, the baby is nearly five times more likely

to be born prematurely and twice as likely to need the help of special-care nurseries. The baby also faces

nine times the risk of having breathing difficulties, cyanosis (lack of oxygen) on feeding, and jitteriness.

Other published side effects of Prozac include: anxiety, significant weight loss, cardiac arrhythmia, visual

439

disturbances, tremors, nausea, diarrhea, asthma, arthritis, osteoporosis, stomach bleeding, loss of sex drive

and impotence.

And it gets worse. on January 2, 2005, CNN reported that an internal document purportedly from Eli

Lilly and Co. revealed that the drug maker had data more than 15 years ago showing that patients on its

antidepressant Prozac were far more likely to attempt suicide and show hostility than were patients on

other antidepressants and that the company attempted to minimize public awareness of the side effects.

The document was provided to CNN by the office of Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-New York, who has

called for tightening FDA regulations on drug safety. “The case demonstrates the need for Congress to

mandate the complete disclosure of all clinical studies for FDA-approved drugs so that patients and their

doctors, not the drug companies, decide whether the benefits of taking a certain medicine outweigh the

risks,” he said.

The 1988 Eli Lilly document indicated that 3.7 percent of patients attempted suicide while on Prozac, a

rate more than 12 times that cited for any of four other commonly used antidepressants. The document,

which cited clinical trials of 14,198 patients on fluoxetine – the generic name for Prozac – also stated that

2.3 percent of users suffered psychotic depression while on the drug, more than double the next-highest

rate of patients using another antidepressant.

The paper also said that 1.6 percent of patients reported incidents of hostility –more than double the

rate reported by patients on any of four other commonly used antidepressants. In addition, the trials

reviewed in the document said that 0.8 percent of users of Prozac reported causing an intentional injury –

eight times the rate associated with any of the other antidepressants.

In the paper, titled "Activation and sedation in fluoxetine clinical trials," the authors said that the drug

may produce nervousness, anxiety, agitation or insomnia in 19 percent of patients, and sedation in 13

percent of patients.

The British Medical Journal reported that the documents disappeared in 1994, during the case of

Joseph Wesbecker, a printing press operator who had killed eight people at his Louisville, Kentucky,

workplace five years before while taking fluoxetine. He then shot and killed himself.

The FDA has recently warned that antidepressants can cause side effects such as agitation, panic

attacks, insomnia and aggressiveness. This is truly bad news for people in Great Britain. Prozac, the antidepression

drug, is being taken in such large quantities that it can now be found in Britain's drinking water.

Environmentalists are calling for an urgent investigation into the revelations, describing the build-up of

the antidepressant as 'hidden mass medication'. The Environment Agency has revealed that Prozac is

building up both in river systems and groundwater used for drinking supplies.

Meanwhile, back here in the U.S., we've had Prozac in our waterways for months already. A Baylor

University toxicologist discovered traces of Prozac's active ingredient (fluoxetine) in the tissue of blue gill

fish in a lake in Dallas, Texas. Brooks speculated that the fluoxetine made its way from the urine of

Prozac users through a water treatment plant and into the lake.

Researchers from the University of Toronto recently published a study in the Lancet, showing that all

classes of antidepressants are dangerous for the elderly (aged 66 and over) to take, and will greatly

increase their risk for a fall and fracturing a hip.

In recent years, the herb Saint John’s-Wort, or Hypericum perforatum, has been recommended by

numerous psychiatrists for their patients suffering depression. The herb, which is often taken in pill form,

is at least as effective as Prozac and other antidepressants, and has little or no side effects.

A staggering 4 million kids a day line up at their school's nurse's office for their daily afternoon doses

of Ritalin. Starting millions of small children on a prescription drug for attention deficit without ever

taking a moment to seek out the root cause of the problem being treated is a true form of “medical

440

negligence.” While taking Ritalin, or a similar medication, will bear results practically overnight, it could

take several weeks or months to figure out the root causes behind the behavior. In so many cases, it is

sugar, insulin resistance, and poor nutrition that are causing the mental irritation, poor concentration and

nervousness. Giving the child more loving attention is often enough to make them feel safe and secure

and help restore emotional and physical balance.

Steroids, Arthritis Drugs, NSAID’s

A medical investigation in the United States has shown that more people die from legal prescription

drugs than from narcotic drugs such as heroine and cocaine. The ratio is an astonishing 76 to 24 percent!

This study does not account for the contra-indications of the drugs, which kill another 20,000 to 30,000 a

year. It is nearly impossible to know how many people are being hospitalized because of contraindications

from drugs, but careful official estimates indicate that they make up about 5 percent of all the

patients lying in American and British hospitals today.

Steroids belong to another group of drugs that were formerly used only for extreme life-threatening

conditions. Today, they are used for such minor problems as sunburn, skin eruptions, acne, and glandular

fever. Patients are rarely aware of the dangers that may arise from taking these drugs. Side effects include

high blood pressure, stomach ulcers with possible opening of the stomach wall (this is how my father

died), cramps and dizziness, inhibiting growth in children, irregular menstruation, weakening of muscle

strength, slowed healing of wounds, vision problems, skin atrophy, allergic shock, loss of libido, decrease

in bone density, slow growth in children after six weeks, manic depression, and emergence of latent

diabetes. Steroids are now handed out even for babies at the first sign of inflammation of any sort. But the

drugs cannot cure a single condition; all they do is stop the body from responding to an abnormal

condition. The new diseases caused by the drugs may require further treatment using even stronger drugs,

adding more side effects to the ones that already occurred.

The latest “breakthrough” drugs for arthritis produce such strong side effects that it might be better to

live with arthritis than risking one’s life. The manufacturer of one popular brand known as Butazolidin

alka was obliged to warn the consumer that this particular drug was very strong and had led to cases of

leukemia (cancer of the blood) even after short term use. Additionally, the drug can have 92 side effects

including hepatitis, high blood pressure, dizziness and unconsciousness, as well as headaches. The

manufacturer advises the treating doctor to enlighten their patients about the possible dangers that can

arise from taking the drug, particularly if they are over 40 years old, and to use the smallest possible but

still effective dose. The manufacturers admit that that the drug can cause serious and life threatening

reactions while having no effect in improving the condition of the disease!

NSAID’s, the common name for over a dozen or more non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, are

used to treat rheumatoid and osteoarthritis24. However, for the past few years, the drugs are given to

people for such simple complaints as recurring headaches or inflammation. In return for the pain relief,

however, the patient may die as a result of gastric bleeding caused by the extreme toxicity of the drugs. A

warning placed on each NSAID prescription says: “Serious gastrointestinal toxicity such as bleeding,

ulceration, and perforation can occur at any time, with or without warning symptoms, in patients treated

24 A new study by the Tel Aviv University in Israel and a second one by the University of Miami concluded that ginger extract

(255 mg per day for 6 or more weeks) may be optimal for the treatment of osteoarthritis.

441

chronically with NSAID therapy.” If this doesn’t sound like Russian Roulette to you, the death toll from

taking the drugs may convince you otherwise. In the U.K., 4,000 people die each year from taking

NSAIDS. In the U.S., the fatality figure is up to five times as high as it is in the U.K. Each year, hundreds

of thousands of people are hospitalized due to gastric bleeding in direct connection with taking these

drugs. Other side effects include perforation of the colon, colitis, Crohn’s disease, blurred vision,

Parkinson’s disease, liver and kidney damage, hepatitis, and hypertension.

A 20-year-old acne medicine that millions of American kids are no doubt taking every day has been

linked to a stunning array of negative psychiatric conditions including suicide, depression, psychosis,

violent and aggressive behaviors, mood swings, emotional instability, paranoia, and changes in

personality. Makes you wonder if is there any drug out there that is even remotely safe.

With the enormous variety of drugs available today, many doctors no longer have the time to study the

side effects of each drug they prescribe and most patients never read the list of side effects that

accompanies the drug. Also, few patients read the small printed contraindications or ask their doctor about

the possible dangers of the drugs. And doctors don’t seem to have the time to warn their patients about

possible side effects. one report on a survey published in one 1996 issue of the British Medical Journal

found that less than two-thirds of patients recalled receiving any advice from their doctor on potential side

effects. Although the doctor has a moral and as well as a legal obligation to inform the patient about the

risks of treatment, in most cases this is omitted. The drug company is legally protected as long as the side

effects and contra-indications are listed and it is up to the patient to decide whether to take a drug or not.

Read Side-Effect Labels to save your Life

Side-effects arising from the use of common medical drugs can develop into some of the most

grotesque symptoms imaginable. The Stevens Johnson Syndrome (SJS), which can progress into a

complication called TENS (toxic epidermal necrolysis) is caused by adverse drug reactions. Before you

start taking common prescription drugs, you may need to inform yourself about this often-fatal reaction.

The list of drugs includes antiepileptic and anticonvulsant drugs, sulfonamides, ampicillin, allopurinol,

and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs), as well as some vaccinations (such as anthrax).

The frightening fact about these drugs is that the reaction is completely unpredictable. For instance, if

you have taken ibuprofen, a popular NSAID, a hundred times you can never know for sure whether or

when the body suddenly becomes hypersensitive to the drug. And when your body starts fighting it, it will

go into an extreme inflammatory response that causes your skin to die, and literally burn away. This sideeffect

can occur at any age group; from infants and teens to the elderly. The morality rate ranges from 25-

80 percent. Those who survive the ordeal are scarred for life, often to a point of total disfigurement. As

the number of people taking these drugs rises, the number of victims increases.

There is no real need for taking any of these drugs. Suppression of symptoms is jeopardizing the

body’s own healing efforts and can only make matters worse. But if you opt for taking a prescription that

puts you at risk for SJS or TENS, watch out for any signs of allergic reaction, such as rash, blisters, a

scalding sensation, or fever and discontinue the medication immediately. Don’t wait for your doctor to

take you off the medication because your life may be at stake.

442

Demented Dirt

There is more to come. As I have mentioned before, Americans over 60 are the drug companies’ best

customers. They are also the most likely group to be prescribed a class of mind-regulating drugs called

atypical antipsychotics, not to be confused with antidepressants. Conventional doctors consider these

drugs to be among the best courses of treatment for mild to moderate levels of the dementia associated

with Alzheimer's disease. However, in recent months, simultaneous announcements from four

major medical organizations have issued warnings about the significant risks many of today's atypical

antipsychotic drugs carry with them. The harmful side effects they cause include obesity, blood lipid

imbalances and adult-onset (type II) diabetes. All of these conditions are well known to increase the

chance of developing heart disease, or lead to a greater risk of heart attack and stroke.

In a recent issue of Diabetes Care, The American Diabetes Association, American Psychiatric

Association, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, and some other associations all joined

forces to warn about this class of drugs. The reason for this unprecedented move is because the companies

that produce theses drugs have refused to list these side-effects on their labels out of fear that nobody

would want to take the drugs. In 2003, the FDA ordered these companies to do so but to date they have

not complied.

Scandalous Drug Business

Naprosyn is a common drug of American origin used for treating arthritis. Even though the FDA had

discovered that the drug company had forged the documents of its drug tests on animals with regard to

tumor formation and mortality, it is not in the power of the government to prohibit the sale of the drug.

Similar scandals are occurring in the treatment of hyperactive or tense children. Over one million

American children, whose behavior is considered not according to the norm, receive psychopharmaceutical

drugs, although there is not a single diagnostic technique to date to determine whether a

child suffers from one of the nearly two dozen symptoms related to tension. Yet the children are treated as

“slightly brain damaged”. The side effects of the drugs are often severe. The children show signs of

retarded growth, develop high blood pressure, nervousness, and sleeplessness, and turn excessively

passive and lethargic. They become depressed and apathetic, a common symptom among those who took

the drugs. By making changes in their diets, such as eliminating stimulating foods such as sugar,

chocolates, and other unnatural sweets, chips, breakfast cereals and basically all junk food can help most

of these children. Many children are highly allergic to artificial colorings and preservatives, soft drinks,

packaged fruit juices, and foremost of all, to artificial sweeteners that may cause brain damage. As

discussed previously, artificial sweeteners are found in most unnatural, sweet tasting foods or drinks.

Most clinical tests on new drugs are financed by the pharmaceutical industry and nearly all information

about the products’ effects and benefits supplied to the doctors comes from the drug companies. An

investigation conducted by respected scientists, including four Nobel Laureates, found that clinical tests

on new drugs are highly scandalous. When the FDA made spot checks on these tests, it discovered that 20

percent of the involved researchers used highly irregular practices, such as applying the wrong doses of

drugs and forging of documents. In one third of the examined “clinical tests,” there were no tests done at

all and another third did not comply with the standard requirements for conducting such tests. The Journal

443

of the American Medical Association reported on November 3, 1975, that the results of only one third of

all checked clinical tests could be considered satisfactory.

So at a time when most drugs are entering the market without scientific backing and justification, both

physicians and patients ought to be even more cautious in the use of drugs. Since there are no long term

studies to prove that a certain drug a patient is using today will not cause him cancer, diabetes, or heart

disease 15-20 years from now, he can never be sure that they won’t. As long as one’s life is not in real

danger, it would be better to avoid drugs, especially if they are combined with other drugs (this amplifies

the side effects by 2, 3, 4 and more times). If you want to know more about a drug, read the list of side

effects accompanying the drug or consult the drug advisory board in your area (if available). Most

medical doctors can give you only the information they receive from the drug manufacturers.

The whole drug-side-effect issue is complicated by the fact that drug reactions are only rarely reported

by general practitioners. The British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology reported in 1997 that “most

prescription drugs are more dangerous than they appear because doctors rarely report side effects to the

appropriate authorities.” This tragic situation was confirmed by the discovery by French researchers of

massive underreporting of adverse reactions to prescription drugs. The French research revealed that only

one out of 24,433 adverse reactions is reported to the various drug monitoring agencies. All drugs are

poisonous, and even if they happen to have a few beneficial side effects, in the majority of cases they

don’t warrant their use.

Doctors are not quite innocent in this regard. Three out of four doctors fail to tell patients about the

toxic side effects of prescriptions. Many of the doctors claim that they just don’t have the time to explain

to their patients about the risks involved. But, obviously, they have the time to treat them during repeat

visits for the diseases that result from the side-effects of their prescriptions. Patients need to draw their

own conclusions on this. Perhaps the following facts will help to make it easier.

? Over the last 10 years, the FDA has approved 12 drugs that proved to have deadly side effects,

including Vioxx, Celebrex, and Aleve, among others.

? The Journal of the American Medical Association reported several years ago that an estimated

125,000 Americans die each year from the side effects of FDA approved drugs. Since the new

drug scandals that occurred in 2004-05, this figure is most likely to be 10 times as high.

? The FDA approved the sale of the statin drug Baycol (later found to cause fatal

rhabdomyolysis – a severe muscle adverse reaction from this cholesterol-lowering product) and

continues to approve the use of other statin drugs to lower cholesterol that are also associated

with this deadly side effect.

? The FDA has aggressively suppressed natural alternatives to drugs. Red yeast rice, for example,

known to be a safe and effective alternative to cholesterol-lowering drugs, was banned by the

FDA in 2001.

? One in five patients is completely misdiagnosed by their doctor, who writes prescriptions for

health problems their patients do not have.

? Up to 20% of all prescriptions given in hospitals could be just plain wrong, causing severe side

effects, for which treatment is required with more prescriptions.

444

The Contraceptive Pill: Catastrophic Risks…

In the United States alone, about 15 million pre-menopausal women are taking the contraceptive pill.

The Pill seems to be the easiest method of preventing an unwanted pregnancy, but also one of the most

risky ones. Although natural methods of contraception have at least the same success rate and cost a

fraction of the Pill or nothing at all, they are rarely publicized. Despite the warning by an increasing

number of health officials about the strong side effects of the drug, it is still regarded as the “best and

safest” method of contraception.

Women who continually use the contraceptive pill are more likely to develop circulatory problems,

liver tumors, headaches, depression, and cancer than those who don’t use them. The risk increases with

age. Women taking the Pill who are between 30 and 40 have a three times higher risk of dying from a

heart attack than women of the same age group who are non-users. Women who are over forty and still

use the contraceptive pill have a six times higher risk of developing high blood pressure, a four times

higher risk of having strokes, and a five times higher risk of developing thrombosis and embolism, a

condition where a blood clot may form in an artery and lodge in an artery close to the heart. The risk of

suffering thrombosis is greatest among short-term users.

In August, 1996, the papers were awash with the shocking news that the Pill has a “time bomb” effect

in causing breast cancer. A four-year study on the Pill, carried out by the Imperial Cancer research Fund

in Oxford, England, reanalyzed epidemiological evidence on the Pill of more than 150,000 women. The

results show that all users face a risk of breast cancer, even for up to 10 years after they stop taking it.

According to the study, published in 1996 in the Lancet, women on the Pill faced a 25 percent increase

in the risk of breast cancer and the risk is still 16 percent up to five years after it is discontinued. Another

large study conducted at the Netherlands Cancer Institute, also published in the Lancet, showed that girls

who started taking the Pill before 20 were three and a half times more likely to get breast cancer. Among

the women over 36 who took the Pill for less than 4 years, the risk of developing breast cancer increased

by 40 percent. What is very disturbing news is that 97 percent of the women younger than 36, who had

contracted breast cancer, had taken the Pill at some point in their lives, even for a short length of time.

This raises a lot of questions, such as “is taking the pill by a large portion of the female population

responsible for the continuous breast cancer epidemic?”

Klim McPherson, arguably the most experienced British epidemiologist on HRT and the Pill, estimates

that up to one in four long-term Pill users who start on it early in life will wind up with breast cancer.

More studies are surfacing almost every other month. Another major Pill study, concluded in September,

1996, has determined that women who have taken the Pill at any time have a 60 percent increase in the

risk of cervical cancer. The repeatedly used medical argument that the risk of developing breast cancer

with the Pill is outweighed by its benefits of protecting women against endometrial and ovarian cancer is

no longer valid. In any event, risking one type of fatal cancer to prevent another type of fatal cancer is a

very questionable conclusion. Because the Pill causes breast cancer and other diseases, it is outright

dangerous and should not be sold to unsuspecting women.

The intrauterine device (IUD), also known as coil or loop, is not a safe method of contraception either.

The IUD has been associated with a number of debilitating side effects. A 1974 report by the Lancet

showed that women who have an IUD fitted are 50% more likely to have a miscarriage as opposed to

17% for those using any other kind of contraceptive. Pelvic inflammatory disease is also common among

users. Other problems include cramping, backache, risk of ectopic pregnancy, perforation of uterus,

greater incidence of tubal infertility, skin rashes, and increased susceptibility to infection.

445

If you consider a potential pregnancy, which is not a dangerous illness, to be less a disadvantage than

risking your life by developing breast cancer, cervical cancer, a stroke, or thrombosis, you are better off

avoiding the Pill or any of the other highly invasive contraceptive methods such as Inject-and-go

contraception and IUDs.

I personally recommend mental birth control, the most ancient method of conception choice, as the

preferable method for avoiding an unwanted pregnancy. It is very effective, cost-free, and without any

side effects. The method can be learned within a few minutes from the little book “Mental Birth Control”

by Terry League and Milder Jackson (see Useful Addresses). My wife and I have been using this most

natural of all methods for years, successfully I might add.

Other methods include “Fertility Testers”, which can determine during which days of the month a

woman is fertile. All that is required is a drop of her saliva. “Persona” is another new method of

contraception. Through simple urine testing, a small, computerized device informs a woman of the days

she is at risk of becoming pregnant. “Persona” is 93-95% reliable when used according to instructions,

which makes it as reliable as the condom. It is readily available at all “Boots stores” in the UK. In any

event, the condom is an option, too.

3. Menopause – Disease or Natural Transformation?

The Folly of Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT)

One of the most commonly treated ‘diseases’ among women today is the appearance of menopausal

symptoms – indications that a woman’s body may be going through major changes in her life. Doctors

believe that these changes (and the symptoms) are caused by a falling off in the production of female

hormones, estrogens, and progestogens, which the body uses to conduct the monthly cycles, pregnancy,

and birth, among other rhythms. To postpone the onset of the dreaded illness ‘menopause,’ which is often

seen as a sign of rapid ageing, and to reduce or eliminate the accompanying symptoms, doctors prescribe

a combination of hormones, known as Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) (Or at least they used to

until the recent media scare). The drugs are also supposed to prevent major illnesses that have been linked

with diminished hormone production, including osteoporosis, heart disease, stroke, and senile dementia.

Influenced by medical authorities and media reports, many menopausal women feel that they are

suffering from a serious hormone deficiency, which may endanger their health, and that Hormone

Replacement Therapy (HRT) can help them lead a more comfortable and carefree life during and after

menopause.

Yet HRT turned out to be everything but preventive medicine and the risks involved are serious.

Taking extra hormones can even endanger a woman’s life. According to research conducted at the Boston

University Medical Center, USA, the risks of suffering a thrombosis increases by 3.6 times with a

“normal” dose of hormones and by nearly seven times if a woman is taking as much as 1,25 mg or more a

day. Like with the contraceptive Pill, the researchers found the risk to be greatest during the first year of

usage.

In the United States, five million menopausal women are at present using hormone replacements.

Numerous studies show that the longer a woman takes HRT, the greater is her risk of cancer, specifically,

breast cancer risk increases by three times and the risk of endometrial cancer by four times. An analysis of

16 studies on women who have been taking HRT for 15 years revealed that taking estrogen alone

446

increased the risk of womb uterine and cervical cancers by 20 times and the combined HRT (estrogen and

progestogen) increased the risk by up to a third. A Swedish study which looked at 23,000 women,

showed that the addition of progestogen actually quadrupled the risk after four years. In this study, the

risk increase of developing breast cancer in women using estrogen-only was 80 percent. The most

comprehensive combined analysis of studies (thirty-seven in number) of breast cancer risk found that

long-term estrogen use increases a woman’s risk of breast cancer by 60 per cent. The results of the very

large Nurses’ Health Study, published in 1995 by the New England Journal of Medicine, found that for

women over 60, the risk of breast cancer was 71 percent. This is a severe blow to those doctors who

recommend that women should take HRT forever, or for at least for ten years after the onset of

menopause. In addition, one study by the American Cancer Society involving 200,000 menopausal

women found that those who stay on HRT for more than 10 years show a 70 percent increase in ovarian

cancer.

Apart from increasing the cancer risk, excessive estrogen causes salt and fluid retention, increases

body fat, impairs blood-sugar control, interferes with the thyroid hormone, causes excessive hairiness and

loss of scalp hair, increases blood clotting, causes depression and headaches, diminishes libido, reduces

oxygen levels in all cells, causes decline of zinc and retention of copper and gives rise to a cystitis-like

syndrome. Over 70 per cent of women on estrogen or progestogen experience such strong side effects that

half of them stop taking the drug after 6 months. In 1992, the British Medical Journal listed some of the

side effects of HRT, which are very similar to the PMT-like symptoms these hormones are supposed to

treat. They include: Monthly period-like withdrawal bleeding and eventual breakthrough bleeding,

abdominal cramps, bloating, breast tenderness, irritability, depression, and anxiety.

Progestogens can also cause abnormally high calcium levels in the blood, alter its sugar and insulin

concentrations, increase the severity of migraines, and lead to gallbladder disease, liver cancer, and

urinary tract infections.

Yet many doctors still prescribe HRT routinely as a preventive to avoid discomfort during menopause,

wrongly assuming that every woman who has menopause will also suffer from discomfort. Hormones are

also sold as rejuvenation drugs and for circulatory problems. They are recommended to middle aged

women who develop signs of depression, although depression can occur at any age and be caused by

numerous other factors than lack of hormones.

In America, the doctors use a highly detailed manual called the Physician’s Desk Reference. By law,

the drug manufacturers are required to list all the risks of their drugs in the manual. The entry for

Hormone Replacement Therapy includes: womb cancer; breast tenderness/enlargement; undesirable

weight gain/loss; elevated blood pressure; mental depression; reduced carbohydrate and glucose

tolerance; hair loss; vaginal candidacies (thrush); jaundice; abdominal cramps; vomiting; cystitis-like

syndrome. Menopausal symptoms may be harmless when compared with any of these side effects.

HRT Fails to Prevent Bone Loss

Many older women take HRT to prevent osteoporosis – a disease characterized by loss of minerals

from bone tissue. A large number of them have been warned by their doctor that their bones would

crumble if they didn’t take it. The latest results from an ongoing study of 670 women in Framingham,

Massachusetts, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, October, 1993 shows, however, that

HRT fails to protect women from osteoporosis – therefore eliminating one of the main reasons for its use.

Only those women being on HRT for longer than 7-10 years, which is far longer than most women stay

447

on the drug, had higher bone mineral density. However, even those on HRT for 10 years were still not

protected from osteoporosis. As soon as they stopped taking HRT, bone mineral density declined rapidly,

so that by age 75 it was only 3.2 per cent higher than it was in women who had never taken the hormones.

Increased bone mineral density was always thought to be a positive effect of long-term use of estrogen

and progestogens contained in HRT and the contraceptive pill. But researchers from the University of

Pittsburgh, USA found that women whose bone mineral density increased as a result of taking extra

hormones have a far higher chance of developing breast cancer. The indicator for breast cancer risk is

therefore not, as previously assumed, bone mineral density but hormone supplementation.

Since most women begin menopause in their fifties, and the greatest risk of fractures is when they are

in their eighties, HRT offers no benefits, unless they take it for 30 years or longer. But in such case, the

risk of developing cancer and other health problems is so high that taking the drug rarely warrants its use.

In 1992, the New England Journal of Medicine provided clear evidence that lack of estrogen does not

cause osteoporosis. In fact, there is some evidence to suggest that estrogens actually contribute to

osteoporosis. Women experience significant bone loss during the 10 to 15 years before menopause,

despite an ample supply of estrogen. During this time there is an almost total decline of progesterone,

another female hormone. Synthetic progesterone, called progestins, is now given combined with estrogen

but has no less serious side effects than estrogen. on the other hand, natural progesterone, as contained in

wild yam, for example, has no negative side effects, but if applied topically in the form of a cream, can

drastically reduce menopausal symptoms and rebuild bone. Natural progesterone affects the bone-building

cells whereas estrogen affects the cells in control of bone reabsorption. For this reason, HRT can only

temporarily reduce the rate of bone density loss but not stimulate the body’s bone-building cells to

produce more bone material.

What Really Causes Brittle Bones?

There is an increasing number of health practitioners and women who recognize that meat, milk and

cheese, instant soups and puddings, sodas such as colas, sugar and other stimulants such as caffeine and

tobacco, alcohol, chocolate, etc. can remove calcium and other minerals from the bones faster than can be

absorbed or synthesized by the body, contributing to osteoporosis more than a decrease in hormones does

(if at all). The rate of urinary calcium excretion, for example, is significantly increased after the

consumption of a high protein meal, i.e. consisting of meat. According to a 1988 study of 1600 women,

published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, vegetarians have more bone density than agematched

meat eaters. Another safe way to increase bone mineral density is exercise. New research,

published in 1996 in the Lancet, shows that exercise can substantially increase bone mineral density by

between 14 and 37 per cent.

Calcium absorption is directly linked with the hormonal form of vitamin D, which is synthesized

through sunlight. Lack of exposure to sunlight alone can lead to bone density loss. Also, excessive

exercise and activity deplete the body’s calcium stores. one of the main reasons for decreased availability

of calcium in the body is diminished bile secretion in the liver due to accumulation of gallstones in its bile

ducts. Without enough bile, calcium cannot be absorbed properly. To meet all the calcium requirements of

the bones the body has to rely on its own abilities to produce this mineral. For example, the enzyme

alkaline phosphatase works with magnesium to produce calcium-crystals in the bone. Women on HRT

have the lowest levels of alkaline phosphatase and are therefore not able to produce enough new bone

tissue. (HRT only prevents the loss of old bone).

448

The body’s original design does not include the premature destruction of its own skeleton. If it gets

destroyed, it is due to other factors than hormone deficiency. Menopause is a natural phenomenon the

body is well prepared for, provided its basic metabolic functions have not been interfered with.

Can HRT Prevent Heart Disease?

Claims that HRT protects against coronary heart diseases are highly spurious. Why should we believe

that while estrogen in the contraceptive pill is known to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease, in

HRT it prevents this condition? To clarify this confusion, a group of Dutch scientists analyzed 18 major

HRT studies and found that women on HRT are healthier than non-users, not because they were taking

HRT, but because they represent a segment of society that can afford regular medical care and would

likely have lower rates of all illnesses (British Medical Journal, May 1994).

Being in a low risk group for illness, however, is no guarantee for preventing the side effects of HRT.

The extensive 1991 Nurse’s Health Study showed a 46 per cent increase in ischemic stroke risk among

nurses using HRT, despite the fact that this group is comprised of women with less diabetes, less cigarette

smoking, and less adiposity than those not using estrogen. Six years earlier, the Framingham

Massachusetts Study suggested that the risk of heart disease is actually increased with the use of HRT.

Similar results were reported by the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1995. one of the first

placebo-controlled trials into HRT and heart disease showed that there were more cases of heart disease in

those taking HRT than those given a placebo. In 2004, one of several Women's Health Initiative (WHI)

studies on HRT was shut down because it endangered the lives of too many women. This eight-year study

of 11,000 women was stopped in its 7th year when it was determined that estrogen therapy may increase

the risk of stroke.

Claims that HRT can prevent Alzheimer’s disease are also unfounded. There is not a shred of evidence

that indicates HRT can keep the brain clear and sharp. A 15-year study published in 1993 by the Journal

of the American Medical Association has shown that estrogen intake does not slow any reduction in

cognitive functions among women. And a 2003 study showed that combined HRT increased the risk of

developing Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia. The FDA now requires a warning about this

on all

HRT drug labeling.

Furthermore, a University of Rochester study reported that women who took HRT suffered from

impaired hearing. If all that doesn’t deter a woman from using HRT, a recent study from Brigham and

Women's Hospital of Boston, Massachusetts, showed a sharply increased risk of asthma for women taking

either estrogen alone or combined HRT. Arguably, none of these health problems are as significant as the

2002 revelation that HRT increases the risk of heart disease – the disease that kills more women than any

other.

As I have shown, this risk was known years before 2002, but was purposely concealed from millions

of unsuspecting woman who are now suffering the long-term consequences of a treatment program that

was pushed by relentlessly greedy drug producers. Their policies are calculating and manipulative. Drug

makers conduct trials in preparation for an FDA review and then withhold the studies that could be

damaging – submitting only the research that encourages regulatory approval. Obviously, by withholding

the negative studies results, doctor are encouraged to prescribe a drug without knowing about

some of the associated problems. Fortunately, the scandalous practices around HRT research were

discovered and announced by the mass media.

449

Menopause – Not a Disease

There exists only a correlation, but not a causal relationship, between low female hormones and

frequent headaches, heavy bloating, hot flashes, and depression that some women experience as they enter

menopause. If a woman’s body were genetically programmed to develop a true hormone deficiency,

which would affect her vital functions, every woman in the world reaching a certain age should be

suffering from these or similar symptoms. Yet, only a fraction of women worldwide encounter

menopausal symptoms. Most of those who do live in developed countries. To understand menopause and

the unpleasant and, often, unbearable symptoms that sometimes accompany this change in a woman’s life,

we need to separate these two issues and see them for what they truly are.

Beginning of a New Phase of Life

Women who view menopause negatively -- as a sign of mental and physical decline – can experience

adverse psychological consequences with the onset of menopause (Gannon, 1985). By contrast, in

countries where women achieve higher status in middle age, like Sweden, Finland, India and China, few,

if any signs of menopause are reported (Varpa, 1970). These findings point out the importance of cultural

attitudes. In other words, what women expect or feel about the midlife phase in their life determines what

they will actually experience.

Menopause is one of the most important time periods in a woman’s life – a time when major

transformations occur on the physical, mental and spiritual levels. It is a time for re-evaluating life and

entering a new phase of maturity, wisdom and success. With a greater sense of maturity and wisdom, a

woman can more easily revise some of her outdated beliefs and habits, improve her diet and lifestyle, and

begin to focus on the deeper issues of life. Sometimes, changes in one’s marital relationship, children

growing up and leaving home, ailing parents, etc., may coincide with hormonal changes and produce a

physical/emotional crisis.

The inner transformation that the menopausal woman goes through can use up a lot of energy as well

as tax her immune system and emotional strength. This is likely to bring to light any hidden anxieties or

physical imbalances that may have been suppressed or left unnoticed for a long time. If a woman was able

to live an unhealthy lifestyle or have a poor diet without developing major health problems before

menopause, she won’t be able to afford doing the same during and after this transition. Her ‘new purpose’

in life, whatever that may be, requires a pure and well functioning physiology.

The ovaries of a woman entering menopause purposely reduce their production of estrogen.

Menopause is not a sign of becoming old or the body becoming useless, it simply prevents a woman from

conceiving children so that she can devote the rest of her time and energy to the process of developing

and maturing new, formerly untapped skills and capabilities. During midlife and advanced age, a healthy

woman’s adrenal glands and fat cells begin to take over the role of producing enough female hormones to

keep her body vital and efficient. Since she cannot reproduce any longer, it would actually be harmful if

she did maintain the old levels of hormones (high estrogen levels are responsible for breast cancer). So

menopause, as such, is not causing hormone deficiencies at all. The story, however, is very different if a

woman hasn’t been healthy before the onset of menopause.

450

It’s Not the Lack of Hormones,…But…

Hormones are made from the food we eat. The body’s ability to produce the right amount of hormones

is mostly determined by the quality of food we eat, the body’s digestive ability and the condition of the

liver. Women who suffer from severe menopausal symptoms do not experience this upset because of a

sudden drop in hormone production, but rather because a long standing digestive weakness is now

becoming more apparent. During a woman’s midlife transition, dietary imbalances and stress generally

cause more chaos and confusion in the body and mind than they did before. As a direct result of this nowamplified

interference in the balanced performance of mind and body, the woman’s ovaries may receive

fewer nutrients. This, in turn, will lower her hormone production. For similar reasons, the adrenal glands

and fat cells may also be unable to maintain their normal output of these hormones.

Stress, alone, can greatly affect the endocrine system that controls blood sugar levels (mood swings),

energy levels, calcium balance, weight and sex hormones. Stimulants have the same effect as stress.

Regular consumption of alcohol, coffee, sugar, chocolate, soft drinks, diet drinks/foods (Aspartame) and

cigarettes strongly interferes with hormone production and is, therefore, sufficient to trigger strong

menopausal symptoms. Cigarette smoking by itself accelerates the destruction of estrogen. During

menopause a woman’s ovaries naturally reduce hormone production. The above stimulants can trigger

powerful and regular stress responses in the body that eventually lead to hormone deficiency. A middleaged

woman simply has no hormone reserves that she can afford to waste. It is incorrect to attribute the

occurrence of menopausal symptoms to the natural decrease in ovarian hormones. If menopause is a

‘hormone deficiency disease, it is certainly not caused by a lack of hormones.

How to Make the Best of Menopause

A balanced diet and lifestyle according to body type [see chapters 4-7] can make a woman’s transition

into the next phase of her life much smoother and more comfortable. A well-balanced vegetarian, low or

no dairy diet that is rich in natural fiber often works wonders. Foods that are processed, refined, preserved,

microwave heated, frozen or reheated may still contain enough nutrients but are all deprived of their

natural life force (Chi, Ki or Prana). Without life force, these foods may reach the blood stream but are

unable to enter the cells where they need to be in order to keep the body healthy. This basic physiological

principle was demonstrated in a classic experiment involving 6,000 healthy cats (as mentioned earlier).

The cats were given highly nutritious food that was placed in a microwave oven, prior to feeding them.

All 6,000 cats died from cell starvation within six weeks.

Freshly prepared meals made of salads, cooked vegetables, grains and legumes serve the menopausal

woman best. Fresh fruits eaten in between meals (mid morning or mid afternoon) provide her with extra

nourishment and life force. Bile secretions and other digestive juices peak at midday, which makes it

easier to digest a heavier meal at this time than if eaten in the evening. Heavy meals eaten in the evening,

especially after 7 p.m., tend to putrefy and ferment in the gastro-intestinal tract during the night.

Hot flashes are not necessarily a sign of estrogen deficiency, however they often, but not always,

indicate that bile and toxins from undigested food are back flushing from the intestinal tract into the

stomach, chest and head areas. The afflicted person is unable to digest food properly, causing food

intolerance and food allergies. Hot flashes may also indicate excessive concentration of food protein in

the blood and protein storage in the walls of capillaries and arteries. This may raise the blood protein

values – Hemocrit and hemoglobin – which give the appearance of redness and heat in the face and chest.

451

Eating a high-protein diet also means that calcium is constantly being leached from the bones, furthering

the risk of osteoporosis. The thickening of the blood and connective tissues reduces the nutrient supply of

cells, including the estrogen-producing ovarian cells and fat cells, which, in turn, disrupt hormonal

balance. This may also result in a disturbance of proper fluid maintenance, also known as water retention,

and a weakening of eliminative functions, which causes nervous disorders, including headaches,

irritability and depression.

Menopausal symptoms, however, can just as often have a spiritual reason. Hot flashes, for example,

may be triggered by an awakening of the spiritual energy Kundalini. The heat waves can ‘strike’ like

lightening during mealtimes, while resting and even during sleep. As this intense energy rushes upwards

from the base of the spine or uterus toward the head, it can cause tremendous heat in the body along with

severe sweating. Afterwards, the body may experience a cold spell reaction.

Treat Your Body Kindly

Energy boosting therapies such as yoga, shiatsu, reflexology, meditation and relaxation exercises,

brisk walking, may make you more comfortable during menopause and even become the most rewarding

time in a woman’s life. Although in some cases, hormone replacements can give almost instant relief of

symptoms, they unwittingly allow toxins to build up to a point of saturation, becoming the cause of more

serious illness, such as cancer or thrombosis. HRT does not correct metabolic imbalances in the body. To

the contrary, it interferes with the body’s own synthesis of hormones, upsets basic digestive and metabolic

functions, and causes strong withdrawal symptoms once discontinued.

Some of the most effective herbal compounds to regulate menstruation, ease menopausal symptoms

and maintain proper hormone production by the pituitary gland include Black Cohosh, Agnus Castus and

False Unicorn Root, best taken together. Agnus Castus is known for safely removing fibroids, cysts and

endometriosis. Taking 25-35 drops of Agnus Castus tincture with water each day for three months can

normalize and stabilize female hormone production. Another effective natural alternative to HRT is

Pfaffia. Wild Yam Root, applied topically, may relieve hot flashes almost immediately. Evening Primrose

Oil also helps ovaries maximize their output of estrogen during the early stages of menopause. For those

who still don’t find relief, Maca root may be the answer; it jogs the pituitary and hypothalamus and

balances hormones in the body. Maca root has helped reduce hot flashes by 80%. Start taking two

teaspoons per day, one in the morning and one late afternoon, as it has an energizing effect which should

be avoided too close to bedtime. When symptoms die down, reduce to 1 teaspoon twice daily. Mix with

juice or take in capsule form, as its taste is somewhat unpleasant.

Still, the best preventative action for reducing or avoiding menopausal symptoms is cleansing the liver,

colon and kidneys. Removing the hundreds or thousands of gallstones that are typically found in the liver

bile ducts of almost every middle age American woman today not only helps to make the menopausal

experience smoother and more comfortable, but also greatly reduces the risk of the following ailments:

bowel cancer; ovarian, uterine and breast cancer; cardiovascular disease; osteoporosis; breast cysts and

breast tenderness; polycystic ovary syndrome; endometriosis; heavy menstrual bleeding; fibroid

symptoms; constipation; varicose veins; gallstone; and, premenstrual symptoms. For details, see the

book The Amazing Liver and Gallbladder Flush by the author.

Menopausal problems can be an opportunity for a woman to put her life in order on all levels.

Menopause brings to the surface whatever hasn’t been successfully dealt with before when she was too

busy taking care of her family or career. The midlife phase doesn’t need to be a midlife crisis. Instead, it

452

can be a woman’s greatest opportunity to deal with any unresolved issues in her life, thereby freeing

herself from all kinds of limitations -- physical, emotional and spiritual. The first and most important step

in that direction is to know that menopause isn’t a disease and that the body isn’t doing anything wrong.

Supporting it and treating it with kindness and respect during this important time in a woman’s life can

make all the difference.

4. What Makes Medical Drugs so Expensive?

Thanks to Judicial Reform Investigations (JRI) we now know why pharmaceutical drugs are so

expense. Some companies claim the active ingredients of the drugs cost a lot, which leads to the high cost.

Many drugs sell for more than $2.00 per tablet. JRI did some investigating and located the offshore

chemical synthesizers that supply the FDA-approved active ingredients to the drug manufacturers. JRI

collected the data and pricing for the active ingredients and the consumer markup price for the most

popular drugs in the U.S. Some of the generic drugs were marked up as 3,000% percent or more. The list

speaks for itself.

BRAND NAME

CONSUMER MARKUP

PRICE &

PERCENTAGE

COST OF ACTIVE

INGREDIENTS

Celebrex $130.27 1,712% $0.60

Claritin $215.17 21,700% $0.71

Keflex $157.39 8,372% $1.88

Lipitor $272.37 4,696% $5.80

Norvask $188.29 134,493% $0.14

Paxil $220.27 2,898% $7.60

Prevacid $ 44.77 34,136% $1.01

Prilosec $360.97 69,417% $0.52

Prozac $247.47 224,973% $0.11

Tenormin $104.47 80,362% $0.20

Vasotec $102.37 51,185% $0.20

Xanax $136.79 569,958% $0.02

Zestril $ 89.89 2,809% $3.20

Zithromax $1,482.19 7,892% $18.78

Zocor $350.27 4,059% $8.63

Zoloft $206.87 211,821% $1.75

The drug companies are not the only ones to make a fortune from these drugs. In actual fact, the

pharmacies take a big cut themselves. For example, if you want to buy a brand name drug that costs $100

for 100 pills, but your pharmacists offers you a generic version of the same drug for $80, you may think

453

you are getting a great deal. Not quite true. The pharmacy gets the 100 pills for $10 and sells it to at 800%

profit! That’s why the pharmacy business is doing so well, evident in the abundance of pharmacies

everywhere.

5. Surgery is Rarely Necessary

Several years ago a committee of the American Congress investigating procedures of surgery in the

United States came to the conclusion that 2.4 million operations are performed unnecessarily each year,

costing 12,000 lives and 4 billion U.S. dollars. The latest figures show that some six million unnecessary

operations are performed each year.

A major study found that most people who were accepted for an operation did not actually need one

and half of them did not even require medical treatment. Many of them were children suffering tonsil

infection. Parents rarely object to the removal of their children’s tonsils, especially since not many side

effects are recorded for this type of surgery. The death rate from tonsil operations amounts to only 1 in

3,000 or even less.

Only a few parents know that tonsils are an important part of the immune system and are needed to

keep the head area free from toxins, bacteria, and viruses. It has been shown that many children become

depressed, pessimistic, fearful, insecure, and shy after surgery, “character traits” that may stay with them

for the rest of their lives. There are natural methods that can support the body in overcoming an infection

of the tonsils without the need for surgery (see “Natural Methods of Nursing” in chapter 10). What applies

to small operations, also applies to big operations. The need for surgical intervention is indicated only in

certain extreme situations.

Most people believe removing an inflamed appendix is a necessity and diagnosing appendicitis is a

reliable thing. But surgeons get it wrong up to 45 percent of the time even when they perform an

exploratory laporotomy in order to come up with a diagnosis. False-negatives – claiming there isn’t a

problem when there is one -- also run high, at around 33 percent. one in five patients with appendicitis

leaves the hospital without a correct diagnosis ever being made, and one in five appendixes removed by

surgery is found to be normal. In the U.S. this amounts to 20,000 healthy appendixes mistakenly removed

every year.

One of the most common operations today is coronary bypass surgery. A seven year controlled study

has demonstrated that except for very rare cases where the left aorta is affected, coronary by pass surgery

does nothing to improve heart condition. In addition, the mortality rate among patients with low risk heart

disease undergoing a by pass operation is higher than it is among those with a high risk. A 1998 study,

published by the New England Journal of Medicine, showed that patients who suffer a mild heart attack

and are given a bypass or balloon angioplasty are more likely to die as a result of the surgery. Another

study that involved researchers from 14 major heart hospitals around the world found that up to one-third

of all bypass operations were not only unnecessary, but actually hastened the death of the patient.

Angioplasty, a relatively new procedure used to open arteries, offers an even lower survival rate than

bypass surgery. Several research studies confirm that patients who have undergone these types of surgery

are as likely to suffer a heart attack as the ones who haven’t. The relief of chest pain (angina) that patients

may experience after a bypass operation can not always be attributed to an actual improvement of the

condition but oftentimes to the cutting of nerve strands during the procedure, to the secretion of

endorphins which are the body’s natural painkillers, and/or to the placebo response.

454

In the case of a bypass operation, the newly inserted pieces of coronary arteries can block up easily

again if the cause of arteriosclerosis is not removed. The U.S. National Institute of Health estimated that

90 percent of America’s bypass surgery patients receive no benefits. Major lasting improvements are

attributed to an improved diet and lifestyle, stress reduction, smoking cessation and regular exercise (see

also chapter 9).

All artery opening methods, like bypass surgery and stents, the widely used wire cages that hold plaque

against an artery wall, can alleviate crushing chest pain for a certain period of time. Stents can also rescue

someone in the midst of a heart attack by obliterating an obstruction and keeping the closed artery open,

at least for a while.

But as it turns out, the vast majority of heart attacks do not originate with obstructions that narrow

arteries. “There has been a culture in cardiology that the narrowings were the problem and that if you fix

them the patient does better,” said Dr. David Waters, a cardiologist at the University of California at San

Francisco.

The heart researchers now know that most heart attacks do not occur because an artery is narrowed by

plaque. Instead, they say, heart attacks occur when an area of plaque bursts, a clot forms over the area and

blood flow is abruptly blocked. And they assert that in 75 to 80 percent of cases, the plaque that erupts

was not obstructing an artery and would not be stented or bypassed. Because the plaque which is attached

to the artery walls is soft and fragile, it produces no symptoms and would not be seen as an obstruction to

blood flow. This makes heart attacks so unpredictable. True blockages in an artery would make

themselves known as severe chest pain and breathing difficulties.

Since heart patients may have hundreds of vulnerable plaques, surgeons cannot not go after all of them.

In fact, coronary artery surgery does nothing to the soft plaque, which is the real time bomb ticking in the

coronaries of heart disease patients.

There are other dangers lurking in a hospital’s operation room. According to a New England Journal of

Medicine report, 1,500 patients a year in the U.S. leave the operating table with some of the hospital's

equipment still inside them. There are wayward clamps, sponges, electrodes, retractors and various other

instruments taking up permanent residence in the chest, abdomen, hips, and body cavities like the vagina.

According to these findings, the chances having such items being planted in your body are higher if you

happen to be overweight.

Complications from these blunders can lead to internal bleeding, infection, and sometimes death. In

quite a few patients, though, these missing items are not discovered until the person undergoes another

procedure or has an X-ray or ultrasound.

Fear Motivated Operations

In the United States alone nearly one million women a year sacrifice their uterus to the scalpel. This

means that more than half of all American women will have had a hysterectomy by the time they reach

age 65. Many of these women will suffer from post-operative syndromes such as depression, anxiety, and

increased susceptibility to stress. I have seen in my own practice that most women who had a

hysterectomy developed ovary problems, breast lumps, digestive disorders, or breast cancer within 1-5

years after the operation.

An investigation carried out in six New York hospitals found that 43 percent of all uterus operations

were unjustified. Other research shows that only 10% of hysterectomies are warranted. Fifteen percent of

those who have a hysterectomy are to remove cancerous tumors, and are thus considered necessary. The

455

other 85 percent are due to uterine fibroids, endometriosis, or other causes of pelvic pain and excessive

bleeding. There are thousands of women every year who have a full hysterectomy (including the removal

of the ovaries) but have not given their consent prior to the surgery. only a few of them make use of the

law to seek compensation, but money cannot return her womb, which is symbolic of womanhood.

Even from a surgical perspective, a woman has less invasive and traumatic options. First, there is the

far less invasive myomectomy, which preserves fertility by removing just the fibroid, but keeps the rest of

the reproductive system intact. A second new procedure is called a uterine artery embolization (UAE) and

is performed by an interventional iadiologist. And of course, there are a number of natural methods to

prevent and remove fibroids and other reproductive disorders like the ones explained in this book.

Balancing estrogen levels through liver cleansing and dietary changes is very important for any woman

suffering from female disorders. It is a well-known fact that fibroids tend to shrink and disappear after

menopause when estrogen levels decrease. The liver is in charge of breaking down estrogen, but is

prevented from doing so properly when it is congested with intrahepatic stones.

Fibroids can also be reduced in size or eliminated using a solution of potassium and iodide, or SSKI.

For more information on SSKI, see chapter 7.

Having a hysterectomy is not without a risk. The mortality rate is 1 in 1,000 procedures and serious

complications occur 15 times more frequently than that. Side effects can occur in more than 40 percent of

operations; they include urinary retention or incontinence, significant reduction in sexual response, early

ovarian failure, risk of a fatal blood clot, and bowel problems.

Induction, Cutting and Caesarean Section

Pregnant women are generally treated with respect and special care, but the methods of delivery used

today can have an adverse effect on mother and baby alike. Before the era of hospital deliveries, the

responsibility to handle deliveries was given to competent women. Home was considered the best place

for all involved. This had been a common practice around the world for thousands of years. Provided that

the appropriate hygienic measures were taken, there were very few birth complications. Today, however,

with most deliveries being handled by male doctors and taking place in the sterile environment of a

hospital room, we have the highest rates of complications at birth. Research from Britain, Switzerland,

and Holland, published by the British Medical Journal in 1996, found that planned home births were the

safest of all options, including hospital deliveries.

In hospitals, delivering mothers are watched over by a number of electronic instruments and machines

that monitor every possible change and that signal the need for an operation just in case something goes

wrong. one of the most common types of surgery during delivery is known as “cutting.” The procedure

helps to widen the vagina so that the baby’s head and shoulders come out more easily. This routine

operation is supposed to prevent tearing of the vagina. Yet if the mother wouldn’t be induced and made

numb by the drugs and were properly prepared for the delivery, she would know perfectly well how and

when and when not to push to release the child from the womb at the right time. The pain would tell her

exactly what to do during the birth process. This would naturally prevent tearing of the vagina. And even

if it did tear, the injury would heal much faster than a cut caused by a surgical knife. Because it severs

important nerves, “cutting” also lowers the mother’s sexual sensitivity, something that doesn’t happen

with “natural” tearing.

The second most unnecessary but most commonly applied operation during delivery is the Caesarean

Section. If the monitoring electronic instruments indicate a sign of irregularity in the heartbeat of the baby,

456

the mother is cut open and the baby is pulled out of the womb. It is well known that the baby’s heart beat

can react to a sudden loud noise made in the proximity of the mother, something that is more likely to

occur in a hospital or operation room than it would at home. An unborn child may increase his heart beat

because of irritating lights shone on the mother’s stomach or strong electromagnetic fields caused by

nearby electronic appliances such as monitors. Controlled birth studies have shown that a Caesarean

Section is performed 3-4 times more frequently if electronic devices were used to monitor the birth rather

than a simple stethoscope.

Mothers during delivery often consent to a Caesarean Section when they see intensified signals of their

baby’s heart flashing on the monitor in front of them. It is quite likely that a baby’s heart activity

produces erratic changes when cold electrodes are attached to its head while it is squeezed through the

narrow tube of the mother’s womb. The procedure of connecting electrodes to the head of the baby before

it is born is itself an invasion that may have serious consequences. A controlled study revealed that 65

percent of all children whose birth has been controlled electronically are at risk of developing growth and

behavioral problems later in their lives.

The very set up of a delivery room in the hospital, looking more like an operation theater, can induce a

fear and stress response in a sensitive mother. The sudden release of anxiety-provoking stress hormones

of the mother may also affect the fetus and make him fearful. The mother’s worries become his worries,

and her fears become his fears. Recent studies have shown that within a fraction of a second after fear has

caused racing of a mother’s heart, a fetus’s heart begins pounding at double its normal rate. Fear can

paralyze many important functions in the body, including those needed for delivering a baby.

Often it is no longer in the hands of the mother to “decide” the time of delivering her baby. Unlike a

wild animal, the human mother may be forced to give birth when the doctor tells her it is the “correct”

time, even though, as it has been shown, his calculations can be wrong by several days or even weeks.

Artificially induced delivery is considered more practical than natural delivery and is also more

convenient to fit the doctor’s schedule. But induced birth causes nearly three times as much pain to the

mother than natural birth does. To deal with the pain she is given strong painkillers, all with strong side

effects. It is a lesser-known fact that many of these mothers and newly born babies end up in intensive

care units.

Over half of all Caesarean operations have serious complications. The mortality rate for mothers who

have a Caesarean is twenty six times higher than among mothers who give birth naturally. Since 75-80

percent of them are performed unnecessarily due to excessive use of the new electronic monitoring

devices, a change of policy could drastically reduce mortality rates among Caesarean mothers.

In addition to the harm done to mothers, babies who are delivered by Caesarean Section are exposed to

the danger of developing serious lung damage which causes a shortage of breath previously only found in

prematurely born babies. In naturally born babies, the uterus contractions press out all the accumulated

secretions in the baby’s chest and lungs and eliminate them through its mouth. Caesarean deliveries

account for more than 25 percent of all births today, of which only few are justified. There are indicators

when there is a real emergency and the doctor normally knows well in advance when a Caesarean

delivery is necessary.

Fewer Surgeons and Medical Interventions -- Fewer Deaths

The American College of Surgeons conceded that the U.S. population would require only about 50

percent of the current number of surgeons to secure America’s needs for surgery in the next fifty years. In

457

1976, the Los Angeles County registered a sudden reduction of its death rate by eighteen percent when the

medical doctors went on strike against the increase of health insurance premiums for malpractice. In a

study by Dr. Milton Roemer from the University of California Los Angeles, 17 of the largest hospitals in

the county showed a total of 60 percent fewer operations during the period of the strike. When the doctors

resumed work and medical activities were back to normal, death rates also returned to pre-strike levels.

A similar event took place in Israel in 1973, when for one month the doctors reduced their daily

number of patients from 65,000 to 7,000. For the entire month, death rates in Israel were down fifty

percent. This seems to happen whenever doctors go on strike. In Bogota, Columbia, the death rate

decreased by thirty five percent when no doctors were available for 52 days, except for emergencies.

6. Hospitals – A Major Health Threat

Unless you require an emergency treatment it is better to avoid hospitals altogether. Many hospitals

today may pose a major risk to your health for the following reasons:

• They are filled with infection causing bacteria that cannot be found anywhere else. Hospitals,

which often house very large numbers of sick people, are the ideal breeding environment for the

sometimes deadly bugs. Hospital patients generally have a lower level of immunity and offer only

little or no resistance to them. Many of the microbes are passed on to the patients through the

cooling towers, air conditioning and heating systems in hospitals. The hospital staff, due to

constant exposure to the bugs, are fairly immune to them, but may also pass them on to the

patients by touching them or their food and clothes, etc.

• Contrary to general belief, hospitals are among the most contaminated places in the world. In fact

it is virtually impossible to keep hospitals spotlessly clean and it does not take much dirt to

become a breeding place for billions of deadly infectious bacteria.

• Doctors can be the worst transmitters of disease in hospitals. Most doctors do not wash their hands

except before an operation, when they wear sterilized gloves and gowns anyway. They may

sometimes touch many dozens of patients within several hours, one after the other, without

washing their hands even once. Even the doctor’s white gown is not as clean as it looks. It is only

clean if it is washed every single day, which rarely happens. And when it is washed, it comes into

in contact with the dirty laundry from the operation room, bed covers, pillowcases, etc. Many

extremely harmful bugs survive the washing machine.

• Bed sheets may be clean but mattresses and pillows are not. The chance of being infected by bugs

living in them is 1 in 20.

• Fifty percent of all infections in hospitals occur because of the patient’s contact with non-sterile

medical instruments such as catheters and intravenous infusion installations. Before they were in

common use, such infections occurred only very rarely.

• In the United States, over 15,000 people a year die from hospital acquired infections. This figure

does not account for those who are considered to be dying, or are already weakened by an

operation. Yet they too are killed by a hospital acquired infection.

• A 1,500-page report of a 3-year study on the causes of death in American hospitals revealed that a

further “300,000 Americans die each year in hospitals as a result of medical negligence.”

458

• The most endangered places in a hospital are the maternity wards because infants have not gained

immunity against any disease-causing agents. The most vulnerable babies are the ones who are

deprived of the antibodies contained in breast milk.

• A hospital patient may receive up to 12 different kinds of medication, all of which produce side

effects that can lead to serious complications and even death.

• Many studies have shown that between 25% to 50% of the patients staying in U.S. and U.K.

hospitals are suffering from malnutrition due to poor hospital diet. Malnutrition was found to be

the major cause of death among old people in hospitals. An undernourished body is hardly able to

defend itself against any type of illness. Add the toxic side effects of the drugs, the presence of

deadly bugs, as well as the stress and anxiety that accompany an illness and the stay in a hospital,

and a poorly nourished elderly person has very little chance of surviving.

• A spot check of 105 U.S. hospitals conducted by the American government showed that 69 of

them had violated basic laws and rules. Andreas, do you have dates for this? The commission in

charge of granting licenses to hospitals (JCAH), however, refused to close them down.

• Most deliveries today take place in the operation theaters of hospitals, which when compared with

home deliveries, increases the infant’s risk of injury during delivery by six times, of getting stuck

in the mother’s birth canal by eight times, of requiring revival techniques by four times, of

becoming infected by four times and of developing chronic physical problems by thirty times. In

addition, a mother is three times as likely to hemorrhage if she is giving birth in a hospital.

Given these and other major health risks linked with a stay in a hospital, it can be said that hospitals

are among the most dangerous places in the world. I therefore advise you to do everything necessary to

prevent illness from arising in the first place so that you can avoid them altogether, unless of course it is

for an emergency like an accident.

Conclusion

This book may challenge many of our most ardently held beliefs about the nature of disease

manifestation, and the practices and theories of modern medicine and nutritional science. Our currently

held world views no longer seem sufficient to provide for a prosperous and healthy future. In fact, they

may even superimpose upon us the frightening premonition that the future of life on Earth is at stake. Yet

the new world is just beginning. The abolishment of outdated principles of living that have kept mankind

limited and fearful for centuries leaves behind a mess of scattered pieces of knowledge that no longer

make any sense. The views, which I have presented in these last few chapters, are certainly not the final

answer to the puzzle of health and illness. As a matter of fact, any viewpoint is a limitation whereas our

true potential is unlimited.

It is not correct to say that the drug AZT used to treat AIDS, or the chemotherapy drugs, radiation, or

surgery applied to a malignant tumor etc., are all useless or harmful. Conversely, it is also not right to

claim that all natural treatments are useful or harmless. Considering the power that the placebo effect can

have in any one person, it becomes clear that even poison like AZT may turn into nectar if a patient is

convinced that it will cure his AIDS. Both disease and medicine are illusory projections of ourselves that

can turn into “reality” when we begin to identify with them or “energize” them in one way or another. It

may well be that a hopeful person receiving radiation therapy for cancer experiences no negative side

effects at all and has a spontaneous remission. on the other hand, a depressed person who swallows a

placebo pill to combat a headache may suffer a stroke. There are instances where people become so

459

enraged with anger that they suddenly suffer a fatal heart attack even though their blood vessels are

perfectly clean. By contrast, a person with 100%-blocked arteries may create his own bypass and suffer

no physical problems at all.

The deep conviction that a particular medicine can help you overcome an illness may be just as

powerful as the pessimistic view that a certain illness like cancer can terminate your life. Deep trust,

however, is rarely present in a person who has AIDS, MS, or cancer diseases that are mainly caused by

low self-worth and repressed emotions. As a recent study has found, distrust, anger, and doubt are more

common among people who are ill. Happy, “non-toxic” personalities rarely fall ill.

Health and disease are accurate projections of ourselves and they mirror back to us everything we are

or who we are. If a person wants to “uproot” his cancer, which may be a manifestation of repressed anger

and frustration, through X-rays, chemotherapy, or radical surgery instead of learning to use the same

energy to regain his piece of mind, the projection of his anger will sabotage any long-term benefits a

given therapy may have. The basic message here is that we can change the projection by changing

ourselves. This book suggests that you take responsibility for everything that happens to you. With it

comes the power to make the appropriate changes that will unerringly lead you to the discovery that you

carry the key to the timeless secrets of health and rejuvenation within you.

"The natural force within each one of us

is the greatest healer of disease."

~ Hippocrates