Sunday, December 28, 2008

Natural Health v/s the Orthodox Medical Community and Their Perverse Propaganda Machine

Natural Health v/s the Orthodox Medical Community and Their Perverse Propaganda Machine

The below reprinted news article, titled “Don’t Take Health Tips from Celebs if You Know What’s Good for You,” ridicules a variety of celebrities for their endorsements of natural healing techniques and healthy holistic living.

Why am I reprinting such an article? Because it is another great example of how the medical community resorts to the use of perverse propaganda techniques to try to scare the public away from natural remedies and holistic health practices.

Celebrities Love Natural Healing

You see, the medical authorities know very well that celebrity endorsements of natural health practices have been one of the driving forces behind the rise in popularity of the alternative medicine movement over the past 20 years.

Numerous celebrities, for example, have appeared on the covers of prominent natural health publications, such as Life Extension magazine or Alternative Medicine magazine (now called Natural Solutions). And not for the publicity, but to tell the world how they were able to find relief and profound levels of healing for often serious health conditions that conventional medicine had been virtually impotent against.

Indeed, celebrities such as Uma Thurman, Kelly Preston , John Travolta, Olivia Newton John, Dick Van Dyke, Fran Drescher, Montel Williams, Pamela Anderson, Suzanne Somers, Richard Gere, Cindy Crawford, John F. Kennedy Jr., Daryl Hannah, Chuck Norris, Ed Begley, Jr., The Judds, Paul Newman, James Coburn, Catherine Zeta Jones, Brad Pitt, Kate Winslet and many others too numerous to mention have told their stories publicly, explaining how, to one degree or another, natural healing and holistic living have helped them heal illness and disease, and have overall changed their lives for the better.

Anatomy of a Propaganda Campaign

So how does the orthodox medical community respond?

First, they set up and fund a bogus “independent” non-profit organization like the one described in the article below, for the purpose of defending medical orthodoxy, and discrediting natural health and holistic living.

Then they have their shills inside the organization circulate propaganda pieces like the one below – disguised as “news” articles. These blatant “hit” pieces are purposely designed to destroy public confidence in natural healing and holistic living.

In the case below, the “news” article vilifies and ridicules celebrities for their belief in natural healing, making them look ill-informed at best, and more than a little bit nutty at worst. Then the article admonishes the general public to avoid celebrity endorsements of natural health “if you know what’s good for you.”

What’s more, in addition to vilifying celebrities who recommend natural health and holistic living, the medical propagandists from the supposedly “independent” non-profit organization skillfully weave half-truths and outright lies throughout their “news” article, attempting, for example, to discredit the vaccine/autism link, or the effectiveness of detox diets.

Perhaps the most telling bit of balderdash in the article below lies in its attempt to discredit the link between excess sugar consumption and obesity. Only a rabid shill for the medical community – which is dependent on keeping people fat and sick for their livelihoods – could write such outright tripe with a straight face.

Why Is the Medical Community So Angry?

But why is the medical community so violently opposed to alternative medicine and holistic healing that they would resort to this kind of crude propaganda campaign?

It’s simple: A recent study conducted by World Health Organization has reaffirmed that almost 50% of world population has shifted or in process of shifting to alternative forms of medicines or natural methods of healing.

In other words, in circulating blatant propaganda pieces like the one below, the medical community is attempting to protect their dwindling turf. And clearly, they are willing to go to any lengths to do so. Theirs is a multi-billion dollar annual industry. And they simply don’t like the idea that people are learning to heal themselves naturally, and to prevent illness through healthy holistic living.

The bottom line is that with half the world’s population moving toward natural healing, the orthodox medical community is seeing the proverbial handwriting on the wall. And they don’t like it one bit.

Continued below...

For a startling, inside look at how the medical bureaucrats have attempted to keep people from learning more about colloidal silver, the world’s most powerful natural antibiotic, see The Colloidal Silver Conspiracy.

For a look at how all-natural Colloidal Silver cures MRSA and other deadly infections the orthodox medical community is losing control of, click


Here then is the “news” article discussed above. While this particular version of the article appeared in the Times Online (i.e., the British version of the New York Times) it has been reprinted by major news agencies across Europe and throughout North America under a variety of headlines. And in every case the essence of the article is exactly the same: don’t listen to celebrity advice about natural healing if you know what’s good for you.

My advice: Don’t take advice from a phony “charity” (i.e., non-profit) organization fronting for the worst elements of the orthodox medical community, if you really know what’s good for you.

-- S. Spencer Jones

Don’t take health tips from celebs if you know what’s good for you

David Rose
December 27, 2008

From Madonna’s quest to “neutralise radiation” to Tom Cruise’s dismissals of psychiatry, celebrities are seldom shy about expressing their views on health and science – even when they appear not to know what they are talking about.

A roll call of public figures such as Cruise and cooking author Delia Smith have offered bogus advice or “quackery” this year, according to scientists and doctors. The charity Sense About Science is concerned that celebrities mislead the public when they endorse theories, diets or health products while misrepresenting the science involved.

Some – such as Oprah Winfrey and Kate Moss – espouse “detox” regimes, while others, such as Sharon and Kelly Osbourne, believe (mistakenly) that the Pill can cause cancer.

Nor are politicians exempt from lending credence to health myths. The US President-elect is among several American public figures who continue to suggest that the MMR vaccination is a potential cause of autism, despite an overwhelming weight of scientific evidence to the contrary.

Stars often make nonsense of science

Bestselling author Delia Smith’s suggestion that obesity is caused by sugar addiction is another of the assertions under scrutiny. In March, the cookery writer and broadcaster told The Times: “That’s what causes obesity. It’s addiction. You need to have six weeks without sugar or sweetener . . . After six weeks, everything will taste sweet . . . because you will have got your palate back to what nature created. We could cure the nation if we cut down sugar addiction.”

Lisa Miles, of the British Nutrition Foundation, counters: “Delia, you’ll never get rid of sugar from the diet, nor would you want to, as you consume sugars naturally in foods such as fruit and milk, which provide us with important nutrients . . . the causes of obesity are much more complex.”

Demi Moore, the actress, surprises the experts with her use of “highly trained medical leeches” to “detoxify” her blood.

Kate Moss, the model, is reported to be on a strict “detox” diet of fruit and vegetables at a health spa in Thailand. But nutritionists note that such regimes exclude important food groups such as protein.

Moss’s friend Stella McCartney, the designer, was criticised last year for saying that a chemical found in skin creams was also found in antifreeze. Gary Moss, a pharmacologist, said that the chemical, propylene glycol, was versatile and its use in cosmetics was not “scary”, as claimed.

Both Mr Obama and his rival for the presidency, John McCain, responded to stories about vaccines by highlighting the rise in diagnoses in children of autism.

Mr Obama told a campaign rally in April: “We’ve seen a skyrocketing autism rate. Some people are suspicious that it’s connected to the vaccines. This person included. The science right now is inconclusive, but we have to research it.” In February Mr McCain had remarked on the rise in autism cases, saying that there was “strong evidence that indicates it’s got to do with a preservative in vaccines”.

The suggestion that the MMR jab is linked to the developmental disorder dates back to a study of 12 children published in The Lancet in 1997. The research, led by Andrew Wakefield, a gastroenterologist at the Royal Free Hospital, has since been discredited. Yet fears about the vaccine – for measles, mumps and rubella – have resulted in many parents refusing to have their children inoculated, and there has been a resurgence of measles.

Dr Wakefield and colleagues have been appearing before the General Medical Council on charges of serious professional misconduct, relating to their original study, which they deny.

Studies in several countries involving millions of children have shown no correlation between MMR and autism rates.

Michael Fitzpatrick, author of MMR: What Parents Need to Know, said that Mr Obama and Mr McCain were correct in noting a rise in cases of autism. “However, authoritative studies confirm that the apparent rise is attributable to increased public and professional awareness of the condition and to widening definitions of autistic spectrum disorders,” he said. “Though the causes of autism remain obscure, exhaustive researches have failed to substantiate any link to vaccines or any preservatives in it.”

The Sense About Science initiative is an update of a leaflet encouraging celebrities to avoid making claims until they have checked the facts. While there has been “considerable improvement” in the way British celebrities approach medicine, the charity says its files are still too full of pseudo-scientific claims. “We don’t expect people to know everything about science; the problem comes when they don’t consider checking it or asking questions.”

No comments:

Post a Comment