Alternative Medicine and Why We Are Proud Not To Be “Scientific”

Thomas Corriher

Alternative medicine is often criticized for its use of time tested methods of observable cause and effect relationships, such as the observation that those who get vaccines can often regress within a short time period, and are disproportionately diagnosed with autism.  A recent fan-mail from an insider commented about our “anecdotal, unfounded, unscientific gobbledygook”.  He noticed that we are not “scientific” like the people he considers to be “experts”, who by the way, cannot seem to even cure their way out of a runny nose, much less any real disease.  On the other hand, the list of people we have helped to cure is ever growing.
Most people have been taught to expect only thoroughly-tested, scientific methodology from mainstream medicine.  However, nothing could be further from the truth.  The Office of Technology Assessment Health Program was asked by the U.S. Senate Committee on Human Resources to evaluate standard medical procedures in 1978.  They produced the stunning report, Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Medical Technologies which is being hosted at Princeton University.  It exposed some alarming statistics, which most people will resist believing.  We have archived a copy of the document in case it disappears, as is common for such documents after we cover their story.

“It has been estimated that only 10 to 20 percent of all procedures currently used in medical practice have been shown to be efficacious by controlled trial.”

The word “procedures” above is likely confusing.  The report writers did not merely cite surgical and in-patient procedures in the document, as many readers will assume.  For instance, this official congressional report also mentioned hypertension medications and antibiotics alongside other standard medications.  Therefore, the use of the term procedures was broadly used as a blanket term describing all methodologies of modern medicine, including pharmaceutical medications.

The report was written by an independent, 3rd-party, which had to be honest in lieu of potential Contempt of Congress charges.  Honesty becomes an appealing policy whenever the alternative is long-term prison incarceration, so we can place some faith in their reporting.  They actually reported that only 10% of modern medicine was scientifically demonstrated to be safe and effective. What about the other 90% of orthodox medicine that is unsafe and ineffective? Would not science dictate that alternatives be used if the standards failed 90% of the time?

Real science is supposed to honestly appraise legitimate and reproducible cause and effect relationships, instead of flatly ignoring them for financial and political reasons.  Thus, there is no connection whatsoever between science and what we call modern “medicine”.

Even willow bark is more scientifically tested and verified than the establishment’s big money-makers like chemotherapy, because willow bark contains the active component of aspirin, which actually has proven its merit in repeated studies.  There are hundreds of independent, 3rd party, peer-reviewed studies proving the safety and effectiveness of aspirin (eg. willow bark), but not a single one proving the safety and effectiveness of chemotherapy and radiation.  We challenge the disbelievers among us to find any credible studies supporting the use of chemotherapy and radiation.  We would like our opponents to consider this as a personal dare.  Just remember the help-to-harm ratio, because all treatments which kill more than they save are neither safe nor effective.  Modern cancer patients rarely die from their cancers, in other words.  It is the “science” that gets them in the end — if you know what I mean.  In fact, untreated cancer patients live longer, and with a much better quality of life than those who get orthodox medicine, so science is hardly our enemy.  True science is the best ally that alternative medicine has.  For this reason, we would love to debate the facts and statistics of modern medicine verses what we do, with our hate-filled detractor, but such people tend to be afraid of us, and for very good reason.

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

Be the first to comment on "Alternative Medicine and Why We Are Proud Not To Be “Scientific”"

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*