Guest guest Posted April 7, 2001 Report Share Posted April 7, 2001 Bravo Barbara! Dr. Lee's book is brilliant and explains the concept of estrogen dominance so clearly, a condition many in our industrialized petrochemical society are suffering from. A lot of " female complaints " can be attributed directly to this unnatural condition we've created in our environment. Not only are we what we eat, we are what we breath, bath in and LIVE. Petrochemical derivatives that are capable of disrupting hormone balance in both men and women are in our foods, water, soaps, detergents, shampoos and perfumes. Until 200 years ago our bodies never had to detoxify this kind of overload and we just don't have the mechanisms to cope with them. It's only natural some people will be thrown into imbalance. Right now " conventional " medicine is not geared towards recognition or treatment. As more people become aware of this as a possible contributing factor to their health problems perhaps science will start expanding it's awareness of environment and nutrition as effecting our health and happiness. Best regards, Harriet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2001 Report Share Posted April 7, 2001 >But in the 1800's laws were passed in the US that medicines could only be patented if they were NOT derived from natural substances. Presumably this law is still in effect in the US. Any indication why they did this? Sounds like a lobby job. Could also be one reason that the US is so slack on herbals and such. ~Jim ************************************************************ In reference to the email below about the 60 Minutes story, after reading just portions of " What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Menopause " by R. Lee, MD, I think it's a must-read, not just for women and not just for older women, but for anyone who's taking prescriptions of any kind. For example, Dr. Lee writes that aspirin used to come from natural sources (willow bark, which has no side effects) and was used for centuries to relieve pain. But in the 1800's laws were passed in the US that medicines could only be patented if they were NOT derived from natural substances. " These days, when a plant with medicinal value is discovered, the `active ingredient' is isolated and transformed. This new molecule can now be patented. " So now we take aspirin which has plenty of side effects because it has been chemically altered only so that it could be patented. Estrogen is a natural substance. What all of us women are taking in birth control pills and hormone replacement therapy is synthetic, it's not estrogen (or it's derived from mare's urine – okay that's natural, but yuck!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2001 Report Share Posted April 8, 2001 ---( level-1 text from Jim. T = 07.04.2001 on 22:37 +0000 )--- > >But in the 1800's laws were passed in the US that medicines could >only be patented if they were NOT derived from natural substances. > >Presumably this law is still in effect in the US. Any indication why >they did this? Sounds like a lobby job. Could also be one reason that >the US is so slack on herbals and such. The legal basis is common to all patent law. Intellectual property (a modern term) can only be conferred on an original and unique idea. If the concept is in the public domain -- already known, existing -- it cannot be the intellectual property of anyone. It belongs to everyone. If you invent something, and make the mistake of publishing something about it, you lose the ability to patent it. Some people that can't afford to get patents choose to do this just so that nobody else can patent the same idea. But relating to the article and Harriet's comments, it all boils down to Better Living Through Chemistry. It is a logical outgrowth of the industrial revolution. Factories were designed to assemble things from raw materials. If the raw materials happened to be petrochemicals, by-products of the fractional distillation process that produces gasoline (petrol), kerosene, etc. (needed for the machines produced by other factories) and the end result is a modified or mass-produced new molecule that can be used to preserve foods, color walls or beef stroganoff, make facial tissues or your dear armpit more fragrant, soften your laundry, or somehow make you well when you get sick from the other things, then it is in line with Improving Man's Lifestyle. I may be way off on the number, but there are probably something like 100,000 chemicals surrounding us every day that did not exist 200 years ago. It is no wonder, then, that doctors who prescribe some of these chemicals don't necessarily understand that some of us may be sensitive and reacting to them or to the myriad substances that are intended to make our lives easier. They may understand drug interactions, but can't possibly know about all possible combinations of thousands of chemicals that surround us and too often invade our tissues. Ray Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.