Thursday, 10 May 2018

THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF PATIENTS. Is it an important issue?

The German car company, BMW, has recalled 312,000 cars because of safety concerns. The cars may be affected by an electrical fault which can cause the engine to cut out completely whilst on the road. Alex Neill, of the magazine Which? has said the recall raised “serious questions about the adequacy of the car recall system in this country” as the issue had been raised a year earlier but only 36,000 were recalled.

               “Drivers will be asking why it took so long for BMW to fully recall these potentially dangerous cars in the UK, several years later than recalls around the same fault in a number of other countries.”

It is good to know that in this sphere, as in most other spheres of life, our concern about health and safety is considered to be sufficiently important to ensure that if there is any suspicion of danger that action is required to be taken.

Yet there is one area of our life, health care and treatment, where 'health and safety' concerns are NOT considered to be so important.

Antibiotic Drugs. These drugs, so long considered a miracle drug, and used routinely with millions of patients, are now implicated in causing all kinds of conditions emanating from the gut, including obesity, diarrhoea, iIrritable bowl disease, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, non-hodgkin's lymphoma, liver damage, diabetes, asthma, eczema, heart disease, breast cancer, mental disorders, and much else.

Statin Drugs. These frequently prescribed drugs have been implicated in causing death, liver dysfunction, kidney failure, diabetes, cataracts, muscle weakness and dementia. Yet they have never been withdrawn or banned, and they are prescribed to, and taken by millions of patients every day.

Painkillers. These commonplace drugs are known to cause the hospitalisation of millions every year, they can cause hearing loss, cardiovascular problems and heart failure, gastrointestinal disease, miscarriage, allergic reactions, and much more. Even doctors are reluctant to prescribe them now, in all the many form painkilling drugs now take, but they continue to be sold openly and cheaply 'over-the-counter' in any pharmacy and supermarket.

Benzodiazepine Drugs. The long-term dangers of these drugs has been known for decades but they still continue to be prescribed by doctors. The side effects include sleep disturbances, rebound insomnia, elevated anxiety, panic attacks, vision problems, tremors, seizures, psychosis and hallucination - yet nothing has ever done about them.

What all these pharmaceutical drugs have in common is that, despite their known dangers to patients, nothing is ever done to protect us from them. There is plentiful evidence of harm, but no action ever follows. The same can be said of antidepressant drugs, beta blocker drugs, steroids, and virtually any other kind of pharmaceutical drug and vaccine that is still sold to the public.

So whilst BMW might be facing justifiable criticism, the pharmaceutical drugs industry does not. Whilst motorists might feel they are being protected by health and safety laws and procedures, patients cannot feel they are being protected by medical science, or the drug regulation agencies. When it concerns our health, apparently, our health and safety does not appear to be important!

The precautionary principle is just not applied to conventional medicine, and to pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines in particular. Many pharmaceuticals are eventually withdrawn or banned but not until they have been harming patients, often for many decades.

  • When there are suspicions that a drug is causing harm we are told that there is no proof (usually because no-one has ever bothered to investigate and find the necessary proof).
  • When studies begin to prove that a drug is causing harm the research is either ignored, or it is said that the link is not 'causal', or that anyway "the benefits outweigh the advantages".
  • Only when there is irrefutable proof of a link between a drug and patient harm are prescribing restrictions imposed on doctors.
  • Only when this irrefutable proof continues, when patients become reluctant to take the drug, and so it becomes less profitable for the drug companies, is the drug withdrawn or banned.
So let's apply this to BMW drivers. Your car might be dangerous to drive, but there is no 'definite proof' that there is a fault with the car. When several other BMW drivers have the same fault the risk is considered slight, or restricted just to a handful of cars, and in any case the benefits of driving a BMW outweighs the disadvantages. When a BMW catches fire, and people are killed (one man has apparently died in the USA) there may be some minor restrictions imposed, for instance on when, where and how the car is driven, but it is still considered acceptable the BMW drivers take the known risks involved. Only when there are LOTS of cars affected, only when LOTS of BMW drivers complain, only when LOTS MORE people are harmed and killed, only when there is a danger that BMW drivers might refuse to buy another BMW car, is any action taken.

This is not acceptable, is it? So why should it be acceptable for patients taking pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines?

Wednesday, 9 May 2018

Keeping Healthy Naturally with Safe and Effective Medicine. My 'eureka' moment

Readers of this blog often ask me how I became interested in safe medicine, and why I have dismissed conventional medicine as too dangerous to use. Read about my 'Eureka' moment!

When I developed painful gastric ulcers, now over 40 years ago, I went to my GP. It was the normal, the routine thing to do. We all do it, still. It is what is expected of us. I was in pain, and the first drug I was given did not work at all, beyond some momentary relief. Then I saw a young doctor who gave me a new 'miracle' pharmaceutical drug which he said offered the prospect of a 'wonder' cure. Indeed, the drug did work. In fact it worked 3 times! Each time the ulcers calmed down for a few weeks, but the pain returned again within just a few weeks.

I was offered another course, indeed, it was suggested that I might have to take them on a long-term (life-time) basis. Fortunately, it was then that I discovered that this new 'miracle' drug caused serious 'adverse reactions' - to the heart. So for the first time I began to question what I was doing. All I knew, at the time, was that I did not want to swop a bad stomach for a bad heart!

My choice seemed to be between taking this 'wonder' drug, and risking its side effects, or putting up with pain which, at times, was quite unbearable. My doctor, and the NHS, gave me no advice about any other medical therapies. There was, they said (as they always say), no alternative!

So when I was in a lot of pain someone suggested that I consulted a local homeopath I told her that I did not believe in such things! I was that ignorant! But the pain just got worse, and as I was unwilling to take the drug I eventually went to see him. He questioned me for about an hour, then gave me a remedy. I took it, within a few days I felt better. Within 3 months I was pain-free. And I have remained pain free now for over 30 years, with no need to take a remedy! My stomach was cured, and remains so. And more importantly my heart is good too, I have suffered no side effects from either the remedy, or the drug!

The conventional medical establishment routinely dismiss such an experience as 'anecdotal',  or 'unscientific'. Yet homeopathy has performed these cures for millions of people, safely and effectively, and throughout the world, for the last 220 years, most of whom have found homeopath to be both effective and safe in treating illness. Still, conventional doctors tell us that there is 'no evidence' that homeopathy works! It is nothing more than a placebo effect! Only pharmaceutical drugs have an 'evidence base'.

So for me, and for many others over the years, this event becomes a 'Eureka' moment - initially for two reasons.

1. Conventional medicine does not tell patients the truth
First, I realised that my doctors was not telling me the truth, or at least, not the whole truth. The NHS, and the conventional doctors who treated me, did not tell me about the side effects of their new 'wonder' drug. They allowed me to take it without informing me about the damage it might do to my heart.

Nor did they tell me the whole truth. They did not offer me alternative treatment. They did not provide me with information about alternative treatments, linked to diet and lifestyle changes. They did not mention that there were therapies, such as homeopathy, that might treat my ulcers. And they certainly did not offer me access to homeopathic treatment, or any other form of traditional therapy. I had an ulcer. They gave me a drug. I took the drug. I discovered the side effects of the drug alone. Conventional medicine had told me nothing!

From that day I could no longer accept what doctors, and the conventional medical establishment, have told me. I have always felt the need to ask questions about the safety and effectiveness of the medicine we are routinely offered.

2. Making sense of ill-health
Second, I began to study homeopathy, informally at first. It was fascinating. Suddenly I began to make sense of the world of health and disease in a way I had never done before. Disease was not something that struck people down, indiscriminately, for no reason. I had gastric ulcers because of my stress-full lifestyle, because of what I was eating, how I was eating it, and because I never took the time to allow my body to relax and recover from the stress I was putting it through.

What my homeopath said made sense. The remedy would help, the ulcers would probably heal, but in the longer-term it was important that I should help myself by changing my lifestyle.

I began to understand the concept of 'susceptibility' and 'pre-disposition' to disease. It explained much, for instance, that whilst medieval plagues killed many thousands of people, not everyone died, many survived. They were not susceptible. Yet sickness and disease was increasing to epidemic proportions all around me. Not everyone was affected, but it was not a question of good or bad luck, people became ill for a reason, just as other people remained well.

It was an amazing moment. The clarity of this new understanding, and the new insights it gave me into health, was empowering. I began to see through the 'battleground' that conventional medicine had created with its toxic drugs and vaccines, their war against the body, and the bacteria and viruses that normally live peacefully alongside us. I began to question the desperate attacks on childhood diseases, the invasive vaccinations, the aggressive drugs that 'fought' this, and 'destroyed' that.

Conventional medicine seemed to believe that it could 'balance' the human body better with its drugs and vaccines than our own internal self-healing mechanisms! What arrogance was this? Did the doctors really know best? Did their drugs and vaccines really provide us with the miraculous answer to disease? So my personal experience helped me recognise the arrogance of the conventional medical establishment.

Through homeopathy I was able to understand the body's relationship with the world in which it lived, microbes and all! I could see how, in contrast to  conventional medicine, homeopathy sought to enhance the body's ability to maintain and regain good health by living peaceably alongside them. It taught me to trust the amazing ability of the human body to protect itself from harm, and to heal itself from whatever dis-ease it suffered.

I began to understand how the medical warfare that conventional medicine engaged in with the human body, to get it to comply with the 'norms' they had of it, was not only doomed to failure - it was both unnecessary and positively harmful to our health. So not only did I reject pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, I began to understand why they were so obviously wrong, harmful, so self-evidently counter-productive to health. I began to examine what was happening to the health of people within my family, amongst my friends and work colleagues, and I did so not through the eyes of conventional medicine, but through my new understanding. Those who were taking drugs, or being vaccinated, seem to be sicker than those who did not take them.

For instance,when I managed a group of residential homes, I saw older people taking a cocktail of pharmaceutical drugs, and not getting better, but progressively more sick. Worse, older residents on some pharmaceutical drugs seemed to lose their interest and involvement in life, in the world around them. So many of them lost not only their physical health, but their mind too. They became forgetful, confused, then demented. And then they died.

Of course, doctors put all this down to old age. Conventional medicine always does when it fails to treat disease successfully. But I was convinced that the pharmaceutical drugs they were taking were playing an important part in their decline and death.

So my world changed. What had seemed normal and acceptable was no longer so. What I had been told was effective was clearly not effective. What I thought was safe was not safe. It was happening all around me. Sick people, given pharmaceutical drugs to make them better, became sicker. And my alternative ideas on health, and ill-health, seemed to fit and explain much better than conventional medicine what was happening to our health. I was beginning to make sense of the world.

So, in a nutshell, this experience is the basis of this blog. We need to ask questions of our doctors (and our homeopaths) and see who seems to be interpreting the world, and what is happening to our health, more accurately. And who had treatments that actually worked!

MEDICAL ERRORS. Are they bankrupting the UK's National Health Service? Or are we wrong to blame the doctors?

                "Victims of NHS blunders should receive smaller compensation payouts or the “staggering” costs of Britain’s negligence bills will bankrupt the health service, the Justice Secretary has been told. Health service leaders have written to the Government, calling for cuts to payments for patients who suffer devastating injuries as a result of medical errors."

Sometimes I read a news bulletin on health and I cannot believe what I am reading! So I have to re-read it in order to decide whether I have got it right first time. The Daily Telegraph recently published a series of articles on 'medical blunders' and the cost to the NHS in Britain. (If you live outside Britain, continue reading - this applies to any health service anywhere in the world which is dominated by conventional medicine).

So why is it being suggested that victims of medical blunders receive less compensation when they suffer 'devastating injuries'? It is, according to this Telegraph article (1st February 2018), because it is bankrupting the NHS.

               "The controversial demand follows years of rising negligence payments, with current liability now at £65bn - a rise from £29 billion in 2014/15."

This is an extraordinary figure. The total cost of the NHS each year is currently in the region of £110 to £120 billion, so these compensation charges now represents 50% of the NHS's annual budget, and this is all money that has to be taken out of the health budget, and so is not available for spending on patient treatment and care. So what is the solution being offered?

  1. The NHS is calling for a change in the way compensation bills are calculated under the existing law.
  2. This will mean that patients who have sustained 'devastating injuries' will receive less money.
On the following day the Telegraph published an article by Peter Walsh, "Cutting compensation for those maimed by the NHS would be 'hideously unfair' " which stated that the previous article "is a stark reminder of how desperate our NHS is for more investment". Stark indeed, perhaps even desperate, with such a prodigious rise over the last 3 years.

               "It is ignorant and uncaring to suggest that people who have been harmed or have lost loved ones as a result of NHS negligence should forfeit the compensation they need."

               "We also need to remember that avoidable harm, in fact negligent harm has been caused to these patients and the sum awarded to them is based on an assessment of their actual needs as approved by the courts. It is not some kind of windfall."

Yet even this misses the real point. Conventional medicine causes harm because it is, it always has been, and it always will be AN INHERENTLY DANGEROUS FORM OF MEDICAL TREATMENT. 
  • Pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, on which conventional medicine is totally dependent, are dangerous, even when they are properly prescribed.
  • They are also largely ineffective, and this leads to the need for other inherently dangerous interventions, such as surgery (most surgery would be unnecessary if the drug).
Walsh goes on to outline the reasons for the NHS approaching bankruptcy, and he comes out with the usual culprits - an ageing population - cuts to social care budgets - staff shortages - and lifestyle factors.

Not a single word about the fact that it is the conventional medical system that has produced this level of patient harm and injury.

This is typical of the failure of the mainstream media to do their job -  to investigate and identify where the problems actually exist in health provision. And whilst journalists are content merely to parrot conventional medical mantras (that older people and patient life styles are to blame) there is no chance that the real reason underlying our health problem will ever be identified.

It is also typical of the pharmaceutical industry, the underlying cause of most, if not all the mayhem being caused to patients within the British NHS. They want to be protected from any blame, and the cost of putting right the damage they have cause to patients. 
  • In the USA the pharmaceutical industry is protected from prosecution for vaccine damage by the Federal Government.
  • In Britain, the pharmaceutical industry is protected from paying compensation to its victims by the NHS, via the central government.
It is the failure of conventional medicine that we are witnessing here, but which national governments and the ineffectual mainstream media are refusing to recognise. 

We now need to recognise that pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are not only (i) ineffective and (ii) dangerous for patients, they are also (iii) extraordinarily expensive.

Friday, 27 April 2018

Homeopathy, and other traditional medical therapies, is just bad business. They make patients better, so they are no longer a source of income!

               "Drug companies are avoiding developing drugs that work well especially if they provide one-off cures because they will lose on-going revenue."

               "Biotech companies innovating in the field of healthcare are struggling to get investment if their products are too effective (even with sky-high pricing) and provide an actual cure for disease."

These are two of the amazing conclusions reached by Milton Packer MD, Distinguished Scholar in Cardiovascular Science at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, Texas. This Alliance for Natural Health article says that he is "a top-level cardiologist and clinical researcher". As such he is a member of the Conventional Medical Establishment, someone who does not usually speak negatively about the pharmaceutical industry. Apparently, it is Packer who has drawn up and tested the heart failure protocols used throughout the Western world, and he is "a firm advocate of ARNi drugs for heart failure".

During the years I practiced homeopathy I often said that, as a business, alternative medicine was its own worst enemy! Patients would consult with me about their illness, I would treat them, and some 70-80% would get significantly or entirely better. As they left, I would write up the case notes, and smile....
"There goes another customer!"

But this is what healers do, and have always done. They see their task as making people better, and the satisfaction of the job is that patients DO get better, and they CAN get on with their lives - without need of further medical attention. It is, though, bad for business!

The pharmaceutical industry realised this a long time ago, and this is what Milton Packer is saying. They are not interested in developing 'wonder' cures, 'miracle' drugs - this is just the propaganda needed to sell more drugs, more vaccines. They know that the best business strategy is to keep patients sick, and not make them better!

               "..... it is estimated that about one out of every four Americans over the age of 55 are currently being prescribed cholesterol-lowering statin drugs, in spite of the evidence that these drugs do not prolong lifespans, and have very serious side effects. Studies have confirmed that dementia, especially early onset dementia, is often caused by too many pharmaceutical drugs."

The article goes on to outline the long list of drugs known to cause dementia (also outlined here), the strategy of expanding prescribing guidelines to get more healthy people on drugs like Statins, and drugs to lower blood pressure, and the side effects (that is, illness) they cause as a result. The outcome of taking drugs are serious and inevitable.
  • Pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines all have serious health side effects, most of which need treating with other drugs, which have side effects, which need treating - and so on.
  • It is the ineffectiveness of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that is causing the continual crisis in the UK's NHS, and other national health services. Patients just do not get better.
  • It is the adverse drug reactions, which I call DIE's (or Disease-Inducing-Effects), that have caused the epidemic levels of chronic disease, of all kinds, that we have been experiencing for decades.
Apparently Goldman Sachs have also recognised this problem, and as a result they are reluctant to invest in trendy new 'gene therapy' research. They think it might be too successful, and they have asked the question
"Is curing patients a sustainable business model?" 

The conclusion is clear. Conventional medicine is an illness service, not a health service. The NHS, which is dominated by the pharmaceutical industry, is in constant crisis because it is failing to make patients better, its treatments are actually making them sicker - because this is a better business model!

If the NHS, and other health services, were dominated by homeopathy rather than by conventional, drug-based medicine, there would be no ongoing NHS crisis, there would not be patients with long-term, incuarable sickness, or patients who need to take drugs for a lifetime, and disease would not be increasing so rapidly, year on year.

Thursday, 26 April 2018

EPILEPSY. Another drug is banned - after being 'widely prescribed' for over 50 years.

Conventional medicine does not protect patients from the harm caused by its pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.

Valporoate has just been banned by the UK's drug regulator, the MHRA (April 2018). Doctors have been instructed not to prescribe this epilepsy drug to any women of childbearing age, "unless they are on a pregnancy prevention programme". Doctors have also 'advised' not to prescribe the drug, also known as Epilim, or Episenta, or Depakote, for the treatment of migraine and bipolar disorder. So is this evidence that conventional medicine is protecting patients?

Hardly. The drug was discovered in 1882, and its 'anticonvulsant properties' in 1962. The pharmaceutical industry quickly obtained approval from French drug regulators in 1967 and Valproate quickly became the most widely prescribed epilepsy drug throughout the world.

So it has taken conventional medicine over 50 years to discover that Vaproate was a dangerous drug, and to take action to protect patients.

This tardiness is not untypical of conventional medicine, and their failure to protect patients. I have listed many pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that have been banned or withdrawn over the last 100 years and more. The same process is repeated, time and time again. A drug is found, it is quickly approved by drug regulators (whose main task is not to approve drugs but to protect patients from harm), used thereafter for many years, often many decades, and only accepted as 'dangerous' when this can no longer be denied. So is it possible that the conventional medical establishment did not realise that valproate was dangerous.

Hardly. The (appropriately entitled) health magazine, What Doctor's Don't Tell You (WDDTY) reported as long ago as April 2005 that pregnant women taking Valproate for their epilepsy were doubling the risk of their unborn child developing cognitive impairments.

Since then the evidence against Valproate has been building, but largely censored by the mainstream media (who have still, at the time of writing, to my knowledge, not reported the ban), and ignored by conventional medicine. So our doctors have continued to prescribe it regardless of the harm it has caused to patients. 

Doctors have been warned about the drug throughout the last 50 years - consistently. For example, on 13th October 2014 the GP magazine, Pulse, published an article "GP's advised not to prescribe valproate medicine to pregnant women"
  • There is little doubt that this dangerous drug has continued to be prescribed despite its dangers being well known within the conventional medical establishment.
  • Nor can there be any doubt that over 50 years, many pregnant women have taken this drug, on the advice of their doctor, and many are now caring for children who were damaged by the drug.
So is it just pregnant women who are in danger from this drug? Hardly. Have a look at the website (now apparently owned by the pharmaceutical industry). They have posted these warnings about Valproate.
  • This medicine may cause very bad and sometimes deadly liver problems. This most often happens within the first 6 months of using valproate injection...... 
  • Children under 2 years are at greater risk of deadly liver problems.....
  • There is a greater risk of liver failure and death in patients who have a genetic liver problem caused by a mitochondrial disorder.....
  • This medicine may cause very bad birth defects if you take it while you are pregnant. It can also cause the child to have a lower IQ....
  • If you are able to get pregnant, you must use birth control that you can trust while you take valproate injection......
  • This medicine may cause very bad and sometimes deadly pancreas problems (pancreatitis). This may happen soon after use as well as many years after use.....
Then click on the linked 'side effects' page to see the full horror story of Valproate, and remember that this is a drug that conventional medicine has been quite happy to use for the last 50 years, and only now, only in the UK, has it been banned. This happens so frequently that no-one should consider any pharmaceutical drug or vaccine to be safe, regardless of what their doctors say.

If anyone, at this moment, is taking a pharmaceutical drug, be warned. The conventional medical establishment is not there for our safety, it is there to sell drugs - quite regardless of the harm they may cause us. The drug(s) YOU are taking, at THIS moment, may be the next drug that has to be banned!

Wednesday, 25 April 2018

New and Rare Childhood Diseases. Where do they come from? Alfie Evans, Alfie Dingley, Charlie Gard?

Anyone listening to the news at the moment will know about the plight of Alfie Evans. Indeed, children with rare and deadly childhood diseases seem to be regularly featured in the mainstream media these days. I have written about two of them before, Charlie Gard in July 2017, and Alfie Dingley in February 2018. In these cases, and many others that we do not hear about, the situation appears to be similar, if not the same.
  • The disease is new, rare, deadly, and often without diagnosis.
  • The cause of the disease is unknown to conventional medicine.
  • There is no (conventional) treatment for the disease.
Usually, the discussion around each case is about life support and treatment, keeping the child alive, questioning whether the child might get better treatment outside the UK, and parents going through the courts, taking on the medical establishment in order to decide on such issues. The crucial and most important question, however, is never asked, as it rarely is within conventional medicine or the mainstream media.

What is causing these new, rare and deadly diseases, and why is there no treatment?

Without asking this basic question it is likely that dimmest cases, involving different parents with as yet unborn babies, or as yet healthy young infants, will continue to happen. The latter is an important statement. Most of these children are born normally, and developed normally for many months before being 'struck down' with the disease. Moreover, the symptoms of these 'new, rare and deadly' childhood diseases are often similar, if not identical. They involve seizures, epilepsy, neurological damage and organ failure. So what are these rare childhood diseases, and how many of them are there?

Orphanet describes itself as "the portal for rare diseases and orphan drugs", and in answering the question about how many rare diseases there are it says:

               'There are thousands of rare diseases. To date, six to seven thousand rare diseases have been discovered and new diseases are regularly described in medical literature. The number of rare diseases also depends on the degree of specificity used when classifying the different entities/disorders."

In answer to the question - what is the origin or cause of these rare diseases Orphanet says that some are genetic, some are 'rare forms' of infectious disease, such as auto-immune diseases and rare cancers, and that "to date, the cause remains unknown for many rare diseases." It says that most are serious, often chronic and progressive diseases, that signs may be observed at birth, but are more usually observed during infancy or childhood, and occasionally in adulthood.

The International Children's Palliative Care Network outlines just 10 of the 1,000's of these rare childhood diseases. This is how they they are described. In reading these short descriptions note the following about the causes, symptoms and treatments mentioned:
  • most do not begin until infancy or later.
  • many are nearo-degenerative conditions or organ failure.
  • usually no cause is mentioned, or the cause given is not a cause but a description of what is happening, or the cause is 'inherited'' (How can there be an 'inherited' cause when these are 'new diseases, and parents, and previous generations of the family have not had the disease).
  • There is never any treatment or cure.
Batten Disease
This affects boys and girls. Symptoms ... usually start between the ages of 5 and 10 years, and include loss of vision or seizures. Over time there is a loss of muscle control and some wasting of brain tissue. Progressive sight loss and dementia occur. There is no treatment available to cure or slow the progression of Batten disease and it is always fatal, with death usually in the late teens or early twenties.

Duchenne muscular dystrophy
DMD affects the use of voluntary muscles in the body and is inherited, primarily affecting boys of all ethnic backgrounds. Normal development occurs initially but between the ages of 2 and 6 the affected child may have difficulty walking, running or climbing and struggle to lift their head due to a weak neck. Eventually the heart and breathing muscles are affected which leads to difficulty breathing, fatigue and heart problems due to an enlarged heart. Even with the best medical treatment young men with DMD seldom live beyond their early thirties.

CANDLE (Chronic Atypical Neutrophilic Dermatosis with Lipodystrophy and 
Elevated Temperature) Syndrome
This is a very rare autoinflammatory disease. It is an inherited, genetic condition. Patients have recurring fevers, beginning in infancy, which happen almost daily. They also present with delayed development, skin rashes and unique facial features such as thicker lips, swollen eyelids. Children develop swelling around the eye sockets, clubbing of fingers and toes and gradual enlargement of the liver. There is no effective therapeutic treatment for CANDLE syndrome and life expectancy is compromised with death often resulting from organ inflammation. Quality of life is also severely affected.

Childhood Interstitial Lung Disease or chILD
This is a broad term for a group of rare lung diseases that can affect babies, children and teens. The disease harms the lungs by damaging the tissues that surround the alveoli and bronchial tubes and sometimes the air sacs and airways. Lung function is decreased, blood oxygen levels reduced and the breathing process is disturbed. The disease has only been researched in the last decade and it is not
known how many children have each type of chILD. Severity differs according to the type of
the disease but can lead to early death. There is no cure.

Ehlers-Danlos syndromes
These are a group of genetic disorders which share common features including easy bruising, joint hypermobility, skin that stretches easily and weakness of tissues. Symptoms vary in severity according to the form of the disorder and treatment according to the particular manifestations present in the patient. Symptoms may also affect the autonomic nervous system used for breathing and urination.

Ellis Van Creveld syndrome
This is an inherited disorder due to an error on Chromosome 4 and is usually diagnosed at birth. Symptoms include short stature, short forearms and legs, extra fingers and toes, narrow chest with short ribs and malformed pelvis. 50–60% have a heart defect. Respiratory infections are common and about half those born with this syndrome die in early infancy.

Gaucher disease
Types 1, 2 and 3 is an inherited storage disorder where fatty substances build up to toxic levels in the spleen, liver, lungs, bone marrow and sometimes in the brain. It is genetically inherited and affects both boys and girls. Symptoms of Gaucher Type 2 begin in infancy, usually by 3 months and these children seldom live past 3 years of age.

Krabbe Disease
This has 4 subtypes, each beginning at different ages. Type 1 is the most common and begins between 3–6 months. It affects the nerve cells and causes nerve cell damage, leading to loss of use of muscles, increasing muscle tone, arching of the back and damage to vision and hearing. There is no cure or way to stop the disease once it is in full swing and babies with the Type 1 infantile form usually die by 13 months.

This is a rare and aggressive childhood cancer of unknown cause. It usually affects children under the age of five, and can occur before a child is born, often spreading to other parts of the body before any symptoms become apparent. Long-term survival for children with advanced disease older than 18 months of age is poor and most of the survivors have long-term effects from the treatment.

Pompe disease
This is caused by a deficiency or lack of an enzyme, leading to the build-up of glycogen and has an infantile and late onset form. The former usually appears in the first few months of life where babies have trouble holding up their heads. The heart muscles become diseased and the heart becomes enlarged and weak. Babies with the infantile form usually die before their first birthday due to heart failure and respiratory weakness.

I have read many more descriptions of these rare childhood diseases, and the symptoms seem to be similar. Indeed, many reflect the known 'side effects' of the DPT and MMR vaccines.
Most other vaccines have similar side effects. This is because the problem with all vaccines is the mercury, the aluminium, and the other toxic metals that are part of the ingredients.

So is the cause of these new, rare and deadly diseases really unknown? Or is the cause of these diseases known but the conventional medical establishment do not wish to admit culpability. If this is so we can expect to hear about many more Alfie Dingley's, Alfie Evans', and Charlie Gard's in future. Whenever  conventional medicine says that the cause of an illness or disease is "not known", or when they provide a description as a cause, or when they dismiss it as 'genetic', I smell a cover-up.

I cannot prove the link, and it is unlikely that the pharmaceutical companies will ever fund research into a possible link (or if they do they will ensure that the 'scientific' findings are favourable). Conventional medicine still pretends that it does not know the cause of Autism, even though all the evidence points towards the link with vaccines (except for a few 'studies' funded by the drug companies).

So beware, any parent who wishes to use the 'precautionary' principle with their children health. They would be well advised to stay clear of childhood, and indeed vaccination at any age. If these 'rare' and 'deadly' diseases are caused by vaccines, they are certainly worse than diphtheria  whooping cough, measles, mumps, and rubella - and any other traditional childhood illness, all of which are more safely and effectively treated with homeopathy.

Four Months of Critical Information is Missing from Alfie Evans’ Timeline
I am not alone in harbouring my suspicions about the origins of these cases, and the links with the vaccines conventional medicine insists on giving all our young children. This Vaccine Truth article looks at the known medical history of Alfie Evans, from documents submitted to the courts. The most important fact is that Alfie was healthy when he was born,  His death, less than two years later, needs therefore to be satisfactorily explained, but the public records leave important gaps. What Vaccine Truth have done in this article is to fill in the gaps by adding what usually happens to children - the normal vaccine schedule. PLEASE READ THIS IMPORTANT ARTICLE, which goes into the detail. But the essential timeline is this.

  • 9 May 2016. Alfie was born. Tt was said that “Alfie was a happy smiling baby who seemed to be perfectly well.”
  • By 15 July 2016 the first evidence of an issue emerged. Alfie had a 'divergent squint'.
Between these two dates children usually receive thew Pediacel or Infanrix IPV Hib, Preventer 13, Bexsero, Rotarix vaccine. Did Alfie have them? If so, why did the medical authorities not report it to the court? If he did not, on the basis of this accusation, will they now confirm it (and I will withdraw this blog).
  • 15  September 2016 Alfie had his 4 month development check by which time "it was clear that M already had some concerns about her son's general development.
Between the last two dates, Alfie would have been scheduled to have two more vaccinations (which were once called the DPT vaccine). Again, this was not mentioned in the court documents. Did he have them, and if so, why did the medical authorities not report it? If he did not, on the basis of this accusation, will they now confirm it (and again, I will pledge to withdraw this blog).

Killing a child with a vaccine that has been known for decades to damage and kill young children is one thing. To cover it up is another.

Tuesday, 24 April 2018

Our Doctors and the consequences of the over-Prescription of Pharmaceutical Drugs. Will they ever tell us how many people conventional medicine kills?

How honest can our doctors be about the harm caused by the pharmaceutical drugs and  vaccines? It must be difficult for them to prescribe a drug for one condition, and then tell the patient they have acquired another disease, often a more serious disease, as a result of the 'side effects' of the drug. Even more difficult to tell the family that the drug has caused the patients death. I have no sympathy for them. Their 5 year training, plus their years of clinical experience, must have taught them that this is a possible consequence of conventional medicine.

So patients like you and me are prescribed drugs, and we get sicker. This blog has been making this point, consistently, for the past 9 years. It explains why doctors don't tell us, but it begs the question - how much longer are patients going to accept pharmaceutical drugs, and how long can doctors continue to refuse to tell us what too often is the outcome of conventional medicine?

I-News has recently informed us that the European Parliament in Brussels that some of Britain’s "top health experts" are concerned that the overprescription of pharmaceutical drugs is reaching epidemic levels, and that they believe this epidemic is causing excess deaths. They have asked for a thorough 'Chilcot style' inquiry over the tens of thousands of annual deaths they think these drugs cause.

               "They claim that millions of people are being prescribed medications for no good reason at all. Some of the focus drugs were statins, blood pressure medications, and type-2 diabetes drugs. They assert that these drugs do more harm than good, essentially pointing out that harm done via side-effects outweighs any benefits. And this, they say, is leading to a massive spike in deaths that could ultimately be avoided if there were more responsible prescribing."

Does that sound alarming? Does that sound like news that every single one of us needs to know? Might we not expect that this is something that should hit the headlines of our national media? That governments, the NHS, the Drug Regulators around the world, would want to tell us?

Yet what we get is silence! A deafening silence. It seems that we are not supposed to know, that our task is to continue taking the pills, regardless of the consequences. Conventional medicine does not work on the basis of either 'informed consent' or the 'precautionary principle'. Doctors tell us what we need, what is good for us, and we are expected to comply.

The I-News article goes on to mention a Cambridge University study that found that 50% of people over 65 years of age take a minimum of 5 drugs a day, up 12% from two decades ago. This study, at least, was reported by the Times, and I have blogged on the situation facing older people here, "It's us old people who are ruining the NHS".

               "When it comes to what’s killing people, heart disease and cancer are still topping the charts. However, overprescription of drugs has now moved into the 3 slot. In the UK, it is estimated that overprescribing of drugs is killing 125k to 150k people annually. That’s an insanely high number of people. While big pharma has been fined in the billions for all types of nefarious activity, they’ve hardly been called out as a supreme cause of what they claim to cure. Pharmaceutical companies easily pay fines and consistently operate under the guise that their misdeeds are by far overshadowed by all their good deeds. The thing is, 150,000 deaths a year in a country as small as the UK is now throwing salt in that play."

I-News then quotes Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a cardiologist and member of the Academy of Royal Colleges as saying that being an honest doctor doesn’t mesh with the new world of pharmaceutical prescribing, calling the current state of affairs an “epidemic of misinformation.”

               “After almost 17 years as a doctor, I have slowly and reluctantly come to the conclusion that honest doctors can no longer practice honest medicine. Poor quality research, influenced by vested interests has resulted in an epidemic of misinformed doctors and misinformed patients leading to poor clinical outcomes and the unwitting practice of unethical medicine due to the lack of transparency in the prescription of medications, which are now estimated to be the third most common cause of death after heart disease and cancer.”

Doctors are one of the most trusted professionals throughout the world. Yet they are clearly not telling us the truth. Indeed, it is only by not telling the truth about pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that they can maintain their position - as the most trusted professional in the world!

Anyone for homeopathy, and alternative medicine?