Shocking Victory for Alternative Health Care, Mechanistic vs Vitalistic, Your Choice!

Shocking Victory for proponents of Alternative Health Care

by Jon Rappoport  (investigative journalist)                                          March 8, 2018

   I want to treat readers to a brief analysis of “modern medicine,” the so-called scientific system that is the “only valid system.” It is the system employed in Australia, America, and virtually all countries in the world.

People who watch the news or read mainstream news have the impression that “scientific” medical research is remarkably valid and always progressing.  Doctors and medical bureaucrats line up to confirm and ceaselessly push this view.

But they are concealing a dark truth.

Let’s go to the record. Here are two editors of two of the most prestigious and respected medical journals in the world. During their long careers, they have read and scrutinized more studies than any doctor, researcher, bureaucrat, or so-called medical blogger. And this is what they have written:

ONE: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)

TWO: “The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…

“The apparent endemicity of bad research behavior is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviors. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale…Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)

There are many ominous implications in these two statements. I will point out one.

Incompetent, error-filled, and fraudulent studies of medical drugs—for example, published reports on clinical trials of those drugs—would lead one to expect chaos in the field of medical treatment. And by chaos, I mean: the drugs cause widespread death and severe injury.

Again, if a person obtains his news from mainstream sources, he will say, “But I see no evidence of such a vast scandal.”

That is a conspiracy of silence. Because this widespread death and grievous harm HAS been reported. Where? In open-source medical literature.

For example: On July 26, 2000, the US medical community received a titanic shock, when one of its most respected public-health experts, Dr. Barbara Starfield, revealed her findings on healthcare in America. Starfield was associated with the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health.

The Starfield study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), came to the following conclusion, among others:

‘Every year in the US, correctly prescribed, FDA approved medical drugs kill 106,000 people. Thus, every decade, these drugs kill more than a MILLION people!’

On the heels of Starfield’s astonishing findings, media reporting was rather perfunctory, and it soon dwindled. No major newspaper or television network mounted an ongoing “Medicalgate” investigation. Neither the US Department of Justice nor federal health agencies undertook prolonged remedial action.

All in all, those parties who could have taken effective steps to correct this ongoing tragedy preferred to ignore it.

On December 6-7, 2009, I interviewed Dr. Starfield by email. Here is an excerpt from that interview.

Q: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

A: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

Q: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

A: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Q: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?

A: NO.

Q: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

A: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

Q: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

A: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

—end of interview excerpt—

Physicians are trained to pay exclusive homage to peer-reviewed published drug studies. These doctors unfailingly ignore the fact that, if medical drugs are killing a million Americans per decade, the studies on which those drugs are based must be fraudulent. In other words, the medical literature is suspect, unreliable, and impenetrable.

WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TWO ESTEEMED MEDICAL EDITORS I QUOTED ABOVE—MARCIA ANGELL AND RICHARD HORTON—ARE SAYING.

If you know a doctor who enjoys sitting up on his high horse dispensing the final word on modern medicine, you might give him the quotes from Dr. Angell and Dr. Horton, instruct him to read them, and suggest he get in touch with Angell and Horton, in order to discover what has happened to his profession.

As in: DISASTER.                                                                                Jon Rappoport

 

Dr Travis:  There are two basic theories of health care, Mechanistic and Vitalistic.

 Medicine is Mechanistic.  They suppress symptoms with toxic substances called “medicine” that has to prove it can kill you before it can be licensed by the FDA!!  That’s called the “LD50”… Lethal Dose to kill 50% of your test animals with the drug.  If you cannot kill anything, you cannot become a prescription drug!  All drugs stop your body from working in some area.  That stops the symptom but also stops other functions from that area thus creating side effects, so they can sell you another drug to suppress that symptom, and on and on it goes until your body can’t survive the onslaught and dies!

 Some “Alternative Medicine” is also Mechanistic but they try to use “Nutraceuticals” which are synthetic substances that they try to make you think have some nutritional value but are really pharmaceutical chemicals that have not met the LD50 and are thus less toxic but still have no nutritional value and only suppress symptoms more gradually with fewer side effects.  Six drug companies in the world make all the raw material ingredients for 95% of all “supplements!”

 Vitalistic Health Care holds that your body can heal itself if we remove the interferences to health.  Things like toxic drugs, over processed foods devoid of true nutritional value, chemicals in our water and air and cleaning products and make-up and phalates in plastic water bottles and chemical fertilizers and weed killers and GMOs… etc. etc.   Then we need to supply the body with true food with real nutrients that can actually help your body heal and function properly.  These are Not herbs!  Herbal medicine has plant components that stimulate functions in the body albeit more naturally and with few to no side effects but really do not feed the body nutrients it can use to function better.  Chiropractic and Naturopathy are the closest to Vitalistic care by trying to remove interferences to your nervous system and supply the proper healing nutrients.

Do you want to be Vital… or just a mechanical automaton of the medical industry?

Do you want control over your health and well being or not?

Do you want to spend your money on being healthy or support the drug monopoly?

 It’s your choice.  We can help guide you.  Call 512-321-4481 to get started.

Location

Find Us On Map

Office Hours

Travis Chiropractic Center

Monday:

8:30 am-12:00 pm

2:00 pm-4:00 pm

Tuesday:

9:00 am-12:00 pm

4:00 pm-7:30 pm

Wednesday:

8:30 am-12:00 pm

2:00 pm-4:00 pm

Thursday:

Closed

Friday:

8:30 am-12:00 pm

2:00 pm-4:00 pm

Saturday:

Closed

Sunday:

Closed

Testimonials

  • "My husband has only been going to Dr. Travis for a week but he has seen him 3 times. Very pleased that Dr. Travis' adjustments have helped my husband's back pain a great deal."
    J. B. - Bastrop, TX