There is a regulation by the FDA that says
"Only a drug can diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent a disease."
(They mean Pharmaceutical drug)
We all know that pharmaceutical drugs do NOT cure anything; in fact the doctors and pharmacies fully admit that they can only treat symptoms of a problem, not cure it. They will even tell you that they just mask the problem or relieve the pain. Sometimes that is helpful, but should never be considered a permanent solution. In addition to that, doctors are allegedly taking kick-backs from Big Pharma, etc. to promote and prescribe these drugs.
At the same time they force anyone advertising natural remedies and actual cures to display a legal disclaimer stating, and I quote:
“This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent a disease."
We all know that the natural remedy IS intended to cure the problem and CAN successfully eliminate the disease. Pick up any bottle of natural “food supplements” and look for the above disclaimer. Why do you think they are called “supplements” instead of “cures”?
Remember this is only a regulation. It does not qualify as a law. Yet the government will throw you in federal prison if you go on TV and claim that an orange can cure scurvy. We know that Vitamin C does cure or prevent scurvy, yet you will be found guilty of a federal crime if you try to tell anyone this in an ad.
Does that sound like free speech to you? There is no law to enforce, they simply wrote an FDA regulation. This is a direct violation of the 1st Amendment. In fact this is exactly the kind of abuse that the 1st Amendment was designed to prevent.
Limited application of the word regulation:
“No regulation, ordinance, or other rule issued as anything but an act of Congress shall have the force of law on the general public, but may be applied only to government agents.” - constitution.org
And I would add, “…and nor shall any billed passed into law, not supported by accurate Implementing Regulations (which is required of all laws), be considered as valid or enforceable and neither shall any regulation, ordinance or judges ruling, be considered or held up as law without an act of Congress, but instead be considered null and void.”
Actually there should be no need for this kind of oversight as it is already current law today, yet is not being adhered to. How are they, (the government, Big Pharma, the FDA and the AMA), getting away with this?
I'll tell you why; because we are hooked on these drugs and we let them tell us right from wrong.
The truth?
NO DRUG “can diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent a disease” That statement should be law.
Comments?
Replies
OH YES !! NOW you're getting on a subject I am well educated in. Started when I was in high school ('64) & the "Thalidomide babies" & "water head babies" were commonly being born. Accentuated when, as a young bride, my husband was medically evacuated from Vietnam. A yr. later, released both from the hospital & active duty as a feral animal addicted to morphine. No debriefing, no weaning from pain meds, no psychology/psychiatry referral. We beat the addiction alone, but I can't describe the nightmare ! A couple of yrs. later, as a new x-ray tech., I questioned why our "spent" radiation implants were being buried behind the hospital I worked at (under cover of darkness on 3rd shift). Wasn't long till I was labeled a "troublemaker" & unable to find work as an x-ray tech. The iodine (I 131) we used at that time had a 1/2 life of 144 yrs. ! That means it took 144 years to deteriorate to 1/2 strength ! How many hospitals were doing this in the 60's & 70's ?
Years went by, & I was sitting at a desk entering lab. & x-ray orders on the pc (as an ER tech.) when I got THE phone call......diagnosed w/ a stage 3+ cancer & treatment would have to start immediately if I was to stand any chance at all of surviving ! (where's the compassion in that ?) No matter HOW informed you think you are, panic sets in when facing your own mortality. I, foolishly, accepted their chemo/rad protocol w/o questioning. While this was going on, I started doing research in earnest on alternative treatments. The horror stories abound of practitioners hounded & harassed by the FDA, research & documentation destroyed, litigated into bankruptcy &/or suicide ! I found that in Florida it is actually against the law for a physician to advertise as an alternative medicine provider ! They have to have another specialty & ( in very small print) list their alternative.
But here's what else I learned in 42+ yrs. ER experience:
Doctors are not all in collusion in this.
Have you ever seen the handouts in medicine packages ? You would need 5 degrees to decipher them &
doctors simply do not have the time. They rely on the pharmaceutical reps.
Pharmaceutical reps. are drug pushers.
It requires no medical knowledge; no biology, no chemistry, no bio-med., etc. only a BA.....business ! They simply memorize & regurgitate the propaganda fed to them by their employer.
And yes, MD's are "bribed"...but still not all in collusion:
In order to advance their agenda, pharmaceutical reps. routinely bring catered meals to a Dr. office or busy ER to reach a broader audience as everyone takes a lunch break at some time. Further "trinkets" are left on the table: key chains, stethoscope covers, penlights, GOOD pens, etc. MD's rec. golf sets, "sold out" event tickets, vacations, expensive briefcases, etc......for "giving up their valuable time". And everyone leaves feeling very "informed".
Please don't get obsessed w/ only one area on this road to freedom. There are vast areas to research & broaden your knowledge base on this journey. There has been SO MUCH knowledge with held from us that the internet has become a mixed blessing/curse ! The more you learn, the more rebellious you feel. It used to be considered a "nerd niche", now it is perhaps our only viable source of REAL information. But you still have to practice discernment as there is also a lot of disinfo & plain, 'ol bs opinions floating around. Listen to your heart.
I am well aware that I now have "chemo cancer" & will be fighting a new one every so often. But I have new weapons at my disposal ! Have beat it 4 x's naturally (as confirmed by my oncologist who has a "don't ask, don't tell" attitude) & will till I leave here one way or the other !
In my 70 yrs. on Earth I have learned....everyone has a story if you just have the time to listen. Please don't dismiss people too soon as "not being your kind" simply because they don't agree w/ you 100%. Listen to THEIR story first.....then decide.
Actually, some drugs do cure the actual problem, though this is rather rare. For example, many headaches are caused by constricted blood vessels (possibly caused by dehydration, being struck on the head or just overwork) and simple aspirin helps to expand the vessels around the source of the pain, which eliminates the cause and the pain soon passes. In this case, aspirin treats the primary medical cause. In most of such cases, the pain was brought on by external forces and you can't prevent stupidity. But in such cases, aspirin is a cure. You take it once or twice and the pain is gone and doesn't return unless you do something to bring it back. Now granted, aspirin has its own set of side effects. But that's a different issue. The point is that there are more than a few drugs that do fall clearly into the realm of "cure"; that being, you take the prescribed amount for the prescribed and you don't have to take it any more, unless you take further actions which cause the same problem again, as a new problem, unrelated to the previous event.
Granted, it's fair to say that "most" pharmaceuticals treat only symptoms, rather than the cause. But to make the broad claim that no drug can cure or prevent a disease is totally absurd. Diseases like polio and leprosy would be rampant today, if your preposterous claim were anywhere close to true.
Instead, we should look at what the pharmaceutical companies are producing today. You see, in the past, medicine was run by doctors and those doctors discovered actual cures and the government didn't get in the way of those cures being administered. But BIG Pharma has jumped into the picture and they realize that there are big dollars to be had. This is probably where you got some of your incorrect ideas, since the pharmaceutical companies have found that it's far more lucrative to treat than cure. So most modern medicines are designed to only treat and not cure.
But here's where it gets bad. There are still good doctors out there, who want to cure and who would be developing actual cures, today. But BIG Pharma has spent billions of dollars lobbying to make the development of new drugs so expensive that individual doctors and small companies can't compete. Sure, it makes their own costs go up. But it also means that they get to charge more, when their "treatment" finally comes to market. But the main thing that making the cost so high does, is that it limits competition and insures that no altruistic doctor will be able to come up with an actual cure, to make their "treatment" obsolete. Now add in the cooperation of insurance companies, whose medical insurance premiums (and therefore profits) are based on medical costs and the result is that very few actual cures ever make it to market.
As for supplements, I personally tend to avoid most of them, simply because the few that I have tried did absolutely noting, but lighten my pocket. Also, most supplements are produced in states or nations that don't impose the oversight that the FDA USA imposes on a typical meat market. While I don't trust the pharmaceutical companies all that much, if I had to choose between a "supplement" and a "pharmaceutical drug", I would choose the latter.
But if I had a serious condition, I would go to another country (not a socialized medicine country like England), where I can get honest answers from doctors, who can't be disciplined for telling you something that the pharmaceutical companies and government don't what told. I once had a doctor in England give me the wrong diagnosis. Upon my monthly trip back to the USA, my family doctor corrected the diagnosis and treatment. Back in London, I reported this difference to the doctor there. He told me that he could have lost his license to practice medicine, had he made the proper diagnosis and he could only discuss it with me since I had learned the truth elsewhere. Turns out that since the government controls healthcare over there, they require the doctors to treat the cheaper of either the symptom or the cause. In most cases, it's much cheaper to treat the cause. In this case, it was not a cure. It's just that treating the symptom required a pill that cost about three pence, while treating the cause, required a pill that cost about two pounds. This is where Obama is taking this country.
It's sad, but in many cases (probably most cases), I can get better medical care in Panama than I can in the USA, including access to leading-edge medicines that won't be available in the USA for 5 or 10 years. Moreover, their total medical bills are often less than or close to our deductibles. Go figure…
John,
I did not everything you wrote, but you are not correct on your first point. Drugs, even aspirin do not CURE the SOURCE of the headache. It simply STOPS the SYMPTOMS of the headache. Yes it TEMPORARILY "Cures" the IMMEDIATE SYMPTOM of the pain, but it does that without addressing WHY you got the headache in the first place.You will still get another headache again if you don't find out what is CAUSING your particular headaches. Drugs DO NOT DO THAT, EVER!
For instance, I get Migraines. Ibuprofen, (about five of them) will RELIEVE THE SYMPTOMS of my migraine, quite effectively I might add, but if I stay awake too long, skip dinner and gorge on mass quantities of chocolate, right before bed I will wake up with another migraine. (Not that that is the only way to get one.) The fact is I have the genetic tendency and that is one way to guarantee that I will get one. And I just described one cause. The pain reliever will not cure me of my chocolate problem. NOT EATING CHOCOLATE WILL . My cure is in proper diet and sleep.
My Mother has gotten one every day of her life and no drug ever made has cured her of this problem. She can temporarily RELIEVE the SYMPTOMS however, but that is all she can do. No one knows why she gets them. No Doctor has ever figured it out and no drug has EVER "CURED" the problem. "Cures" are permanent. Relieving symptoms is temporary. You are confused and your statement is provably false. Sorry. Now I will read the rest of what you wrote.
Morton, you will note that I stated "many headaches", not all, are caused by external sources such as dehydration, being struck or just over-exertion. In such cases, the ache that you feel, that you call a headache, is different from the pain of a bruise (though a bruise can cause what is commonly known as a headache). The headache pain is associated with a constriction of the blood vessels in your head, (which can be caused by a bruise).
Migraines are not the same and I don't know of anyone who even claims to be able to cure migraines. But headaches brought on by outside stimulus can, in many cases, be completely cured. If I get to working on some project on a sunny day and fail to drink enough water, I'll get dehydrated and get a headache. I can go inside and drink a large bottle of Gatorade and I'll eventually get over the headache… in several hours. But if I take an ibuprofen or aspirin and drink a full glass of water, the headache will be gone in less than 30 minutes and it won't come back, unless I do something to bring on another unrelated headache. Any future headache that I get will be a separate issue, since it will be caused by bumping my head, over-exertion or some other outside stimulus, not related to the first headache. Therefore, the first headache was cured by the ibuprofen or aspirin.
The only way that you can possibly tie any of my headaches together is by reaching way out and saying that the root cause of all of my dehydration headaches is not dehydration, but rather a mental problem, which causes me to fail to drink enough water. In that case, the cause of all of the headaches brought on by bumping my head is also mental, since I wasn't thinking what was above my head, when I raised up.
Fact: Everyone gets a headache once in a while and most are caused by different stimuli, which means that each headache is independent of the next. Migraines are, of course, a special case, since each is tied to the next by… something… genetics… diet… who knows?
But the point is that some pharmaceuticals really do cure or prevent disease. As I stated earlier, if that were not true, diseases like polio, smallpox, and leprosy would be epidemic in our society. They are not and that's because of pharmaceuticals and it really pains me to say anything good about them, since I have no respect for their business practices (see above).
But as I also stated above, it's clear that most of what the BIG Pharma produces today is treatments, instead of cures. However, just because the pharmaceutical companies prefer, for financial reasons, to release treatments over cures, doesn't mean that they don't occasionally come up with a real cure, once in a while.
Wrong John.
You have simply described how a pill can RELIEVE the SYMPTOMS of a headache. The pill cannot re-hydrate you. It does not cure. Cures are permanent. Relief is temporary. You have yet to refute that.
Headaches are not "caused" by constricted blood vessels, that is a symptom of the cause. Therefore, as even you stated, the "cure is in re-hydrating. While you are waiting for the "cure", (re-hydration) to work, you can RELIEVE the SYMPTOMS, (constricted blood vessels) by MASKING the pain and reducing inflammation, which is treating the SYMPTOMS. It is NOT a cure.
The definition of cure is misleading as it calls it a remedy, but remedies are temporary. If you wish to mince words, then yes aspirin is a temporary cure. That is as far as I will go with idea that Pharmaceutical medications are cures. Don't get me wrong; as a migraine prone individual, I am extremely in love with Ibuprofen when I need it to relieve my symptoms so I may function enough to seek a cure, (exercise, water, whatever). That is the way I look at the difference between a remedy and a cure.
If you had cancer and they gave you a drug and your cancer went away, then came back, the drug did not cure the cancer. It may have slowed it down or provided some sort of relief from the symptoms but it did not cure it. The body cures itself. Doctors fully admit that they are trying to kill the cancer with these "treatments". The treatments however will often also kill the patient. More people die of the treatments than of the disease. Does that sound like a cure?
When I get a headache, its not because my body stopped producing enough Ibuprofen. When one gets cancer, it is not because they haven't made enough radiation to provide the cure. The only real cures come from within. If you get a cut, does it not heal? Without doing anything, the body will heal itself, if you are healthy, (immune systems, etc.). A drug can never PERMANENTLY cure ANYTHING, EVER!
As for polio, etc. the "cure" or eradication of the diseases came from boosting NATURAL antibodies in all humans such that it was virtually eliminated from the human population. The cure was inside us humans, not in the vaccine. If you wish to argue this point further I suggest you take it up with Dr. James Winer. He has his own radio show featuring natural "cures". AM 620 - Google him in the Pittsburgh area. I'm sure he will debate the issue with you if he has time.
I however have got to go. Thanx for the spirited conversation. How 'bout you write an article on your area of proficiency, send it to my email and I will review and post it if you wish. Happy writing.
Good show 5War,
That's how you do it.