By Dr Patrick Quanten MD
I am intrigued by things that don't work. It fascinates me when something that has been planned and said to work in a certain way fails to do so. The fact that it does work, or appears to work, most of the time is not good enough.
As a medical practitioner I have indulged in this fascination. It was easy, tailor made, as nothing in life is a certainty, and as all doctors will tell you "what works for one, doesn't work for the other". But Why?
Why is it that food, commonly known as rabbit food, does not always reduce the blood cholesterol levels? Why is it that strokes and heart attacks are not always caused by high blood pressure? Why is it that antibiotics have not managed to kill off common bacteria, but that on the contrary, old infections are making a successful comeback? Mind you, isn't that the same story for pesticides and insecticides? Why is it that painkillers do not always kill the pain, and sometimes, as in the case of aspirin and paracetamol for headaches, actually causes the very pain it is supposed to numb? Why is it some people have allergic reaction and others haven't?
Somehow, I have always had this feeling that if one person was capable of doing something it must be within the remit of a human being to do so. Although we all are gifted in various ways, which gives us unique skills, we also are all limited by the human body. For instance, there is no human who can swing from a tree branch by his tail. On the other hand, if one human can "read the future", then that must be a skill which is available to all humans. We may not all use it; in fact we may not all be good at it, but the possibility, in theory, is there for all of us. Equally, if diet reduces blood cholesterol in one person, then, in principle, one must be able to find food which lowers blood cholesterol in everybody, although one might have to adjust the kind of food used to the individual. In this case, the assumption that "rabbit food" is good for everybody all the time, is indeed wrong, not the fact that diet influences cholesterol levels.
Western Medicine has focused its mind on the dissection of diseases. It delves into minute bits of our existence; devises tests under laboratory conditions, controlled by non-natural standards; reaches conclusions, which are supposed to be the same for everybody. Western Medicine overcomes the problem of "nothing works for everybody" by using statistics. It turns everything into percentages. A drug is proven to improve your condition by 60%, means that 60% of the tested people got better (not cured!!). This doesn't tell you anything about the drug, it gives you information about the group that was tested. Sixty percent of them got better during the test period, forty percent did not. The reason why they got better is not included in that test. They might have got better because they stopped smoking; because they went on holiday; because they got a new job; because they moved house; because they reduced their alcohol intake; because they fell in love; because they past an exam; because it got better by itself; or because they took a drug which made it better. A hundred and one different reasons why people may start to feel better, but to contribute all the effects of improvement to the one single thing you are looking at - a drug - is extremely short-sighted and very un-scientific. And the so revered "double blind studies", whereby some people are prescribed a placebo and others the real drug and neither the doctor nor the patient knows who is taking what, bears out this criticism. It has been well established over the years that the placebo effect is on average about 45%. In other words, 45% of the people in the trial get better when they take a placebo, an inactive substance. The profession goes through great pains to try and explain this in terms of what the patient believes, as being the main reason why it works in some people. I find this a very patronising attitude; almost half of us are so stupid that when a doctor tells us that within the trial - for which you have to volunteer, by the way - he doesn't know whether or not he prescribes you a drug, that we go in ecstasy about how much good the drug is doing us if we are not even sure we are taking it. If people say they feel better, I do believe they feel better. If they have been given a placebo, they obviously started feeling better for other reasons than the drug effect. Taking into account the percentage of people getting better on a placebo means that if the drug is "proven" to be effective in 60% of the people who took it, the real improvement effect measured is 60 -45 = 15%. I am being optimistic here! Would you take your car to a garage advertising that they mend one in every six? Yet, you take your health to a man who boosts ha can do just that. And I am telling you, he is inflating the figures to inflate his ego.
Western Medicine finds it very difficult to include all facets of life in their evaluation of the state of health. When they do, they separate them out. Do you smoke?, has something to do with the state of your heart and lungs. Do you drink alcohol?, has something to do with your liver and irritable bowels. Do you have a heavy manual job?, has something to do with back problems. Do you get short of breath?, has something to do with asthma. Being lethargic and putting on weight, has something to do with thyroid problems. Having hot flushes or feeling irritable, has something to do with hormones.
Both aspects of Western Medicine, the acceptance that there is "no cure for all" and yet continuing to feverishly look for it and to promote it, as well as the piece-meal approach to life, has no resemblance to reality. There has always been science and scientific study from the moment someone said, "Look at that!" or "How does that happen?".
ALLOWING FOR ALL INFLUENCES IN LIFE HAS BEEN AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE DAILY BALANCE OF HEALTH AND DISEASE FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. ONLY WESTERN MEDICINE, THE YOUNGSTER AMONGST ALL MEDICAL SYSTEMS, FAILS TO ACKNOWLEDGE ITS PRESENCE AND POWER.
The knowledge that all drug interactions are to be regarded as general effects on all aspects of the system has never really left us. You only have to look at the information leaflet supplied by the Pharmaceutical Company included in the drug packaging to realise that they acknowledge that drugs affect all parts of your body. It is called "side-effects". If you want to take a drug that reduces the acid produced in your stomach, than all other effects are unwanted and therefore become "side-effects". Every drug you take affects every cell in your body; just as every breath you take, does; every food item you eat; every person you meet; every sound you hear; and so on.
It also makes sense that the smaller the living organism the smaller the influences that will be experienced. You need a different weight to crush an ant than an elephant. In order to destroy your liver you might need a fair amount of alcohol; to kill one cell, you only need a drop. Something Western Medicine obviously recognizes as they adjust the dosage from adults to children to infants. The way they approach curing a patient is to attack the whole body vigorously seeking a drug effect which either numbs or paralyses the organism; like antibiotics, chemo- and radiotherapy, anti-inflammatories, analgesics, sedatives/antipsychotics, anti-depressants. The individual human cells are also exposed to massive amounts, having a huge effect on their function, in most cases totally destroying or at least disrupting it.
Homoeopathy, on the contrary, has embraced the age-old adagio of "Like cures like"; as opposed to attack, they stimulate. It relies on the healing capacity of the individual, rather than on the destroying capacity of the drug. It stimulates on a minute basis the internal metabolism where it has started to falter. Once the cell has been "woken up", given a hint, it works itself back into health. Excellent communication between all systems in the body allows this process to spread to other cells and other parts. Homoeopathy works, as proven beyond doubt over many years. Homoeopathy has no "side-effects"; when Western Medicine has tried to pin dangers on Homoeopathy it does so from a very narrow, non-understanding, angle. If you see unwanted effects after Homoeopathy treatment, it is because your expectations have not been correct. Sometimes we don't see the whole picture and are rather surprised to find that there were other priorities for healing than the one we had earmarked. That is not a side effect, that is an expression of "Nature knows best".
Western Medicine is only interested in the immediate effect of their drug treatment. The aim is to improve your condition instantly. Notice how a cure for cancer constitutes a five-year survival. I have had a patient who survived cancer three times. That is excellent news for the statistics; in practice it means that the person is never cancer free because it keeps showing up. Cutting out the offending organs removes you from that particular problem statistic but the process of cancer, metabolic imbalances, or arthritis continues unseen and will manifest in some other way.
Homoeopathy, as all ancient medical models, is focussed on the long-term effects. Reaction to any sort of action has a short primary effect, and a long-term secondary effect which is always directly opposite to the primary. Confused? Don't be. When you over-heat the skin you burn yourself, same as when you under-heat. Burns are caused both by heat and cold. Both cause an inflammation, which is a dilatation of blood vessels. In the case of overheating, the blood vessels open to such a degree that fluid is leaking out of the system causing blisters and open wounds (=primary effect). Later, the redness settles, blood vessels are closing, no further blisters are formed, some may even reabsorb (=secondary effect). In the case of cold sores and frostbite, the blood vessels close up, reducing the blood flow, thereby drastically reducing the nourishment to the tissues (=primary effect). Later, the blood vessels open up big time, inflaming the area, creating blisters (=secondary effect). Similar effects are noticed with herbs, all kinds of bodywork and diet treatments, as well as Homoeopathy.
With this knowledge it is easy to see how Western Medicine in its focus to "cure" diseases quickly (=primary effect) is making the disease worse in the long term. The secondary effect being directly opposite means that if a drug has an initial beneficial effect, it surely is going to aggravate the situation in the long run. Homoeopathy, as many other approaches to health, aim for a long lasting improvement generated from within the system, as opposed to in spite of the system. As a consequence short-term effects may show a slight aggravation of symptoms.
IN ITS HURRY TO AFFECT A CURE WESTERN MEDICINE IS EFFECTIVELY PROLONGING THE AGONY AND SEVERITY OF ALL ILLNESS.
Western Medicine has discovered in the last decades of the twentieth century that all cells have a memory and that all cells produce all enzymes, hormones and neurotransmitters required for the function of the cell, the organ and the whole body. If the cell is happy, the person is happy. A healthy system requires all cells to be healthy. Any mishap anywhere has a detrimental effect on the whole. It was furthermore established that most chronic illnesses were endemic in the industrialised world, raising the question about the effectiveness of the available treatments. It was shown that extreme poor hygienic conditions as well as modern way of living were equally disastrous. Poor hygiene renders the population vulnerable to infectious diseases; modern living introduces a whole array of chronic conditions in which the ongoing deterioration of the system's functioning is the major factor. The greater the effort to reduce the exposure of the immune system to all kinds of stimulation, the more varied the disease list becomes and the longer the suffering.
A total lack of understanding and appreciation of the interactive forces of Nature and their value in sustaining life and the quality of it, is contributing to the ever-increasing disease load this Culture is carrying. Their short term and short-sighted view of treatment adds enormously to the disease load, instead of alleviating the suffering.
In the second half of the nineteenth century a French scientist, Antoine Béchamps, had given a rational, scientific explanation of the origin, growth and life activities of germs and of the normal living cells of vegetable, animal and human bodies. He became a Professor and taught at the University of Montpellier and the famous Sorbonne in Paris, where he was able to demonstrate, as early as 1864, that cells and germs are not the smallest individual living organisms, as taught by Pasteur and his followers. He called these organisms "microzymes". All cells and germs - bacteria, viruses, parasites, moulds as well as cells from complex structures - are associations of these microzymes. The physical characteristics and vital activities of cells and germs depend upon the soil in which their microzymes feed, grow and multiply. The higher the quality of the "soil" the higher developed the cell will be. Microzymes that grow in fertile procreative soil will form highly complex cells. The same microzymes feeding on morbid material, living and multiplying in poisonous conditions will develop into organisms of the lower order - bacteria, viruses, parasites. Béchamps was able to demonstrate that bacteria would grow on a rotting base, although the culture was completely protected from outside infections. Changing the soil allowed for other bacteria to grow. Also, he observed that the bacteria in their turn, when they had consumed the decaying materials on which they had subsisted, disintegrated until there was nothing left but the original microzymes from which the bacteria arose in the first place - a complete neat little circle. This of course explains fully why an open wound, left inside a boot without any attention, will become infested with worms (grown from nothing), which live of the decaying human cells, gorging themselves until all dead material has been consumed, and then they themselves die and disappear, leaving a clean and healthy looking wound ready to heal over, without any scarring.
These findings are born out of similar observations and studies done in the early part of the twentieth century on plants and trees. Not only did it become clear that changing the soil, changed the quality of the plant but more specifically it was demonstrated that cancerous processes developed only in trees growing in conditions which were falling well short of meeting the growth requirements for that particular species.
Microzymes of the body which are, rather than the cells, the ultimate units of life, are capable of themselves evolving or changing into various kinds of bacteria both in disease and in death. We are therefore capable of creating our own bacteria in addition to, or apart from, any which may enter our bodies from outside. Béchamps very definitely implies that bacterial action in the body is a constructive and natural process which should never be violently prevented or interfered with, as is so frequently done today.
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT INFECTION AND FAULTY ORGAN PROCESSES SUCH AS CANCER AND ALL CHRONIC DISEASES ARE THE RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE OF, DETERIORATING HEALTH. THE PRIMARY CAUSE OF ALL DISEASE IS ACCUMULATING MORBID DECAYING MATERIAL - TOXINS, TO YOU AND ME.
Western Medicine has lived on the understanding that our bodies were safe under the protection of the white blood cells. The various sorts have a variety of functions, all to do with detecting the invader, chasing him and destroying (eating) him. Although leukocytes, the white blood cells, are not alive, they move like an amoeba (a one cellular animal) and in similar fashion they devour the microbes; a process which protects us from constantly being invaded by foreign aggressors. However, during the late nineteen century Dr Thomas Powell from Los Angeles demonstrated that these so-called valiant germ fighters and germ eaters were in fact particles of morbid, pathogenic matter; that instead of destroying the disease germs they are destroyed by the germs themselves. Inflammation always starts with obstruction of the capillary circulation, caused by white blood cells and other colloid or pathogenic matter. The obstruction causes the white cells in the blood stream to be forced out into the neighbouring tissues (known as the "emigration of the leukocytes"). Stagnation causes them to disorganise and putrefy. This morbid soil develops the microzymes of various disease germs or bacteria.
If leukocytes are nothing more than particles of pathogenic matter than what about the function of the system that Western Medicine believes "produces" leukocytes? Pathogenic matter has been condensed into globular bodies resembling cells. This condensation takes place in the trabeculae of the spleen, and in the lymphatic glands and lymph nodes. This explains why in many diseases characterised by accumulations of morbid matter in the system, the lymphatic glands and the spleen become considerably enlarged.
The freer from pathogenic materials the blood stream and the lymph fluid is, the more rapidly these fluids can pass through the walls of the blood and lymph vessels into and out of the intercellular spaces. If, on the other hand, the blood is in mucoid, viscous, sticky condition with excessive amounts of colloid or pathogenic matter in diffuse form, then the passage of the blood serum through the walls of the capillaries and the cells will be greatly impeded and may become impossible. It is to prevent this mucoid or colloid condition of the blood serum and lymph fluid that the lymph nodules and the spleen condense the pathogenic materials into the comparatively compact leukocytes.
When first formed the leukocytes are neither granulated nor nucleated and are known as "young cells" or "round cells". As they begin to decay a "nucleus" appears; and more nuclei are added, leaving us to name the various stages of deterioration as "new" cells. Sometimes they undergo fatty degeneration, in which they are called myelocytes. Expansion of carbon dioxide gas within the decaying "cell" gives rise to protrusions on the leukocyte which are looked upon as pseudopodia, responsible for the "migration" in an amoeba-like fashion.
Henry Lindlahr MD does not hesitate to affirm that every nucleus or nucleolus seen in a leukocyte is simply a collection of residual matter and is therefore to be regarded as focus of decay. He states that the segmentation of the leukocyte is not a matter of "vital duplication" as has been supposed, but of progressive disintegration; that the increase of its size is due not to growth, but to accretion of the adherence of particles of dead material floating about in the blood stream. The leukocytes are not the "vigilant policemen" as we have been led by their performances to believe, but owe their so-called phagocytic powers to their viscidity, or extreme adhesiveness. The leukocytes gather the bacteria by sticking to and flowing around them. This is followed by the destruction, not of the bacteria, but of the leukocytes. The leukocyte is not the destroyer but the thing destroyed.
If the lymph glands and the spleen are not producing white blood cells, but instead are condensing morbid decaying material into small "bubbles"; or, if we stick to the cell-terminology, if these glands are not producing cells but are collecting and packaging rubbish, wouldn't that then raise the question of what the real function of other internal glands is? Knowing that every cell in the body is capable of producing every single hormone, enzyme, vitamin, protein and amino acid required, as and when, and in quantities relating to needs, in places of need, why would we need to have specific large glands as production centres? Adrenaline produced by a cluster of cells locally will constrict (and as a secondary effect dilate) the blood vessels in that area; produce the same amount in a central gland (top of the kidney) and the effect will be diluted, not targeted and general. To achieve a reasonable effect one needs a larger amount of adrenaline which then of course is going to affect the whole system rather than a local area. Maybe in a similar fashion to the lymph glands, all the glands in our body are collectors rather than manufacturers. The thyroid gland collects thyroid hormones for destruction if there has been an overall overproduction. The cells of the Isles of Langerhans in the pancreas collect and destroy insulin when the blood has been flooded with the hormone, as a direct cellular overstimulation due to high sugar levels. As long as the gland is capable of achieving this clean-up your measured blood sugar levels are normal; when the body cells can no longer produce the extremely high levels of insulin required to process the sugars, the insulin levels drop dramatically, gradually shutting down the collection and destruction mechanism - the Langerhans cells. All of the sudden you have become ill; you are now successfully diabetic. This would also explain why obese diabetics lower their average blood sugar levels when they loose weight, without any sign of increased productivity within the pancreas cells.
Western Medicine's understanding of endocrinology and the workings of the body may fall well short of reality. As the science is based on examining dead or diseased bodies, we may well fail to grasp the real functioning of the system as it is easy to confuse cause and effect under those circumstances. Observation of health could show the way forward, rather than our almost obsessive concentration on illness. Maybe the question why somebody is healhty is far more important than why someone is ill!
THE BASIS OF ALL HEALTH IS A HEALTHY CELLULAR FUNCTION - THE LESS RUBBISH THE CELL PRODUCES THE CLEANER, SMOOTHER THE LARGER SYSTEM, "THE BODY", OPERATES. THE MORE ROTTING MATERIAL INSIDE THE SYSTEM, THE MORE OVERSTRETCHED THE REFUSE COMPANY BECOMES. ONCE THIS COMPANY IS IN TROUBLE THE PILES OF UNCOLLECTED RUBBISH AND DECAYING MATERIAL GROWS QUICKLY, TAKES UP SPACE, ATTRACTS VERMIN AND PESTS. SLOWLY THE WHOLE NEIGHBOURHOOD WILL BE ROTTING AWAY.
LIFE HAS BECOME DISEASED.
Acute illnesses viewed in this context are no more than a valiant effort of the body to clear the system of the build-up of toxins. Increasing temperature (fever) helps to reduce multiplication rates of bacteria as well as increasing elimination opportunities through the dilatation of blood vessels. This allows a greater filtration and a faster metabolising of toxins by the skin, the kidneys, the liver and intestines, and the lungs. In order to expedient a "cure" we should be encouraging this process, not suppressing it.
We can now understand that the so-called "colds" are nothing more or less than forms of vicarious elimination. The membrane lining of the nose, throat and lungs is doing the elimination work of the inactive or sluggish skin, kidneys and intestines. The greater the accumulation of morbid material in the system, the lower the vitality, and the more abnormal the composition of the blood and lymph, the greater the liability to "catch a cold". Nature's purifying methods of elimination of morbid material from the system is in Western Medicine suppressed by analgesics, antiseptics and antipyretics. Suppressing the acute catarrhal elimination can only result in driving the toxins deeper into the system, converting nature's cleaning and healing efforts into chronic disease. It is clear that the cause of a cold does not lie in the cold draught, or the wet feet, but more in lowered vitality, deterioration of vital fluids, and accumulation of morbid matter and poisons in the system; conditions which may have built up over many years. It is Western Medicine treatment that turns an acute cold into chronic asthma or bronchitis.
We can repeat this story for every disease known to man. The exact manifestation of the disease or the microscopic picture is totally irrelevant. Accumulation of rotting material causes all illness. Acute illnesses are direct manifestations of a natural healing crisis, or effort. Chronic conditions are indicators as to which organs or places are particularly under stress because of the accumulated toxic load. Turning an acute manifestation into a chronic illness is done by suppression of the elimination process. The basis of ALL Western medical and surgical treatment is the suppression of symptoms.
We can now rephrase "There is no cure for everybody", as "There is no cure for anybody" since all our treatments produce chronic illnesses.
THERE IS BUT ONE REMEDY COVERING ALL DISEASE: INCREASED ELIMINATION THROUGH THE PROPER CHANNELS. THIS IS ACCOMPLISHED BY JUDICIOUS DIETING AND FASTING, AND THROUGH RESTORING THE NATURAL ACTIVITY OF THE SKIN, KIDNEYS AND BOWELS BY MEANS OF NATURAL TREATMENT WHICH SAVE VITALITY, BUILD UP THE BLOOD ON A NORMAL BASIS AND PROMOTE ELIMINATION WITHOUT INJURING THE ORGANISM.