Resource for Natural Type Doctors

[Guest guest]

kathy matthews wrote:

> Medical monopoly and Money!!!

Wow! that is so much more succinct than my long tirade :-)))

....IRene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc; AASCA; MCSSA; D.I.Hom.

[Guest guest]

> > Medical monopoly and Money!!!

>

> Wow! that is so much more succinct than my long tirade :-)))

> ...IRene

> --

> Irene de Villiers, B.Sc; AASCA; MCSSA; D.I.Hom.

LIBERALISM ...enough said

[Guest guest]

But your tirade has wonderful (but scary) details for those that are still

unaware.

Irene de Villiers <furryboots@...> wrote:

kathy matthews wrote:

> Medical monopoly and Money!!!

Wow! that is so much more succinct than my long tirade :-)))

....IRene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc; AASCA; MCSSA; D.I.Hom.

[Guest guest]

Irene, your post was no tirade. I tirade is an irrational rant. Your post

was extremely valuable. Most of us already know that the other post:

Medical Monopoly and Money is correct. You gave us the facts to back that up.

As

everyone on this group knows, it is one thing to intuitively accept a

principal such as BTD or holistic health, it is quite another to defend these

principals against the misinformation that has been spread through our culture

by

the medical and pharmaceutical industries.

This question of pharmaceutical company involvement is especially

disturbing. I have done some research into drug trials, as I was a subject for

several

years in an MS study, and did not always like the philosophies I observed.

It turns out that within even the AMA and academia, there is growing unease

with the fact that drug companies and drug company money has taken over

pharmaceutical research.

As an example, it is the pharmaceutical companies who have financed the

anti-medical marijuana laws. There is no money to be made, this plant can be

grown by anyone. So millions of cancer and AIDS patients must suffer

excruciating pain, because the " FDA approved " drugs don't address their problems

and/or

create a different kind of havoc. For the record, I don't smoke marijuana,

I don't do any drugs (though I experimented a bit when I was younger), they

are now on my spiritual and emotional AVOID lists.

I mentioned before, I am diagnosed as at-risk for MS, as I have had some

neurological problems in the past. I participated in a major drup company

study

of the drug interferon. While in this study, I continued to see more and

more web-traffic about vitamin D, from academic and other credentialed sources,

such as Canadian medical schools. The American pharmaceutical industry has

been quick to " discredit " these studies, even as studies are coming in (US,

UK) showing up to 1/2 US cases of MS are due to lack of UVB sunlight (best

source of vitamin D). Well, no one's going to get rich if we all start spending

a little more time in the garden, are they.

This is the same type of misinformation that is spread by the packaged food

industry as well. No one will get rich if we all eat fresh meat and

vegetables. They need us to buy their boxed and canned products, and fill up

on

cookies, chips, etc. So they need us to believe that this stuff is " good for

us " , much better than what we can get from nature.

Yah, right.....

Donna

[Guest guest]

dmurr58@... wrote:

> Irene, your post was no tirade. I tirade is an irrational rant. Your post

> was extremely valuable. Most of us already know that the other post:

> Medical Monopoly and Money is correct. You gave us the facts to back that

up. As

> everyone on this group knows, it is one thing to intuitively accept a

> principal such as BTD or holistic health, it is quite another to defend these

> principals against the misinformation that has been spread through our

culture by

> the medical and pharmaceutical industries.

Thanks for the positive feedback. I hope it was worth the time to write.

The information to back things up is often hard to find as the

antagonists try hard to suppress it, and spend money the " other side "

does not have to do so.

For example the information I posted on the drugs and food company

involvement financially against alternative health, was initially openly

on the AVMA website as feedback from conferences and direct quotes from

studies. But as soon as someone expressed shock etc it suddenly became

available only to members of AVMA (licensed vets only in other words.)

It's such an indictment of the society that money means more than health

and happiness. For example recently a client's cat died because their

vet suggested Kaopectate for diarrhea - something that has been used for

many decades for diarrhea in cats. The client used it as per directions

on the bottle (paediatric bottle is used for cats) and the cat died of

seizure and brain bleeding out of all orifices within 2 hours. Pfizer

had changed the ingredients and there is no kaolin or pectin in there -

it now contains bismuth subsalicylate - an aspirin derivative, and

deadly to cats. Same packaging, same name that implies kaolin and

pectin. I asked all my clients to see if their vets knew of the change -

20 answered, not one vet had been informed.

I wrote to Pfizer, they did not even answer and I wrote to the FDA on

why Pfizer was allowed the same name for a changed product that was much

more toxic yet which has been in very common use. No reply. Without a

court case, it goes in the round file. But more importantly they do not

CARE. Have you noticed the wording in the Pfizer ads for their drugs

about how much they care about health and longevity?

> This question of pharmaceutical company involvement is especially

> disturbing. I have done some research into drug trials,

I had a close shave once when I agreed to be involved in a pyribenzamine

trial - luckily I worked in a hospital at the time. They have you sign

that you will not hold them liable if something goes wrong. Charming -

and they catch people who are desperate.

> It turns out that within even the AMA and academia, there is growing unease

> with the fact that drug companies and drug company money has taken over

> pharmaceutical research.

It bothers me even more that the drug companies are setting public and

veterinary and medical policy on the use of drugs. It's drug companies

who have decided how often vaccines are used - not trained medical

professionals nor research!

> As an example, it is the pharmaceutical companies who have financed the

> anti-medical marijuana laws.

Another good example :-)

It comes under that " competition from alternative health " that they want

to stamp out.

They are also worried vitamins and other supplements are making people

healthy - so there is already a law in some countries to limit what

amount can be in a vitamin tablet and there is a process currently in

progress to try to get that adopted in USA too. That will chase some

more sick people towards prescribed drugs. Doctors and vets in USA do

not prescribe vitamins in general, more's the pity, and they are not

usually covered by insurance either.

We will have to work harder and harder for just the RIGHT to obtain

products for health that we want and need.

" Freedom " in my book has to include health freedom.

Namaste,

Irene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc; AASCA; MCSSA; D.I.Hom.

P.O.Box 4703, Spokane, WA 99220-0703.

http://www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html

Veterinary Homeopath and Feline Information Counsellor.