4 reasons to question medicine

Example: in the middle of the last century, medicine denied a priori any relationship between diet and cancer. Then, in the 1980s, a large epidemiological study by the WHO revealed a significant link between types of diet and types of cancer. Yet many oncologists today avoid the subject, or minimize the usefulness of a healthy diet, for example in the prevention of relapse.

The advantage of correcting food hygiene rather than medication, when this is not essential, is the absence of toxic side effects. The list of drugs that have had to be withdrawn from circulation is growing every year. Inventing a new molecule to obtain this or that therapeutic effect is very often a DIY rather than a fundamental one, and we must realize afterwards that thousands of patients have suffered from adverse effects that no one had been able to foresee. See for example Sylvie Simon’s letter on civil disobedience.:

Civil Disobedience – by Sylvie Simon

A few years ago, André Glücksmann advocated civil disobedience regarding the contaminated blood scandal, which “might never have existed if, when there was still time, someone had civilly disobeyed.”

It is certain that contaminated blood is just one example among many: the Chernobyl cloud, diethylstilbestrol (DES), asbestos, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), growth hormone, hormones in animal feed, chemicals in agriculture, the hundreds of medications withdrawn because they had killed people, even though they had been put on the market after “lengthy studies on their absolute safety.” None of the real culprits behind these crimes have been punished, except, sometimes, for a few rare scapegoats. […] These “minor” scandals did not garner as much media attention as the Vioxx® scandal, which was used by approximately two million patients worldwide. It was withdrawn from the market because it was estimated at the time to be responsible for around 28,000 heart attacks and deaths since its introduction in 1999. Now, we know that the number of heart attacks, heart attacks, or deaths could reach nearly 140,000 in the United States alone. Deaths are estimated to account for 30 to 40% of these. However, we must not forget that this poison was chosen in 2003 as “Drug of the Year” by more than 6,000 general practitioners as part of the Medec awards, which recognize the most “effective” drug of the year in terms of health.

All of this could be attributed to unintentional, and therefore forgivable, errors, if it hadn’t come to light that the pharmaceutical company had given its medical representatives false information. The results of a trial that took place in 2000 clearly proved the collusion between Merck and the FDA, who were aware of the heart attack risks, while the company continued to advertise its product on television in the evenings. But in France, where pharmaceutical companies continued to sell it and doctors continued to prescribe it, the French Agency for the Safety of Health Products (Afssaps) declared: “The risk of cardiovascular complications remains low and only appears in the long term.” How many deaths does the risk remain “low”? We’ve become accustomed to this kind of protection since the Chernobyl disaster.

Furthermore, the side effects of medications are often detected with significant delays, and since the initial list of these effects is rarely exhaustive, it can be called into question at any time, even decades later. […]

Religion and politics are considered the two main sources of indoctrination, but we can add modern medicine, which is no longer an art or a science, as it once was, but a veritable religion, because the trust placed in the medical profession today is more a matter of faith and sometimes even fanaticism. People no longer think, they simply “believe.” […]

Moreover, all powers use fear to better dominate, and those who profess “knowledge” skillfully practice this perfectly effective strategy that allows them to obtain the dependence of citizens. As Machiavelli said: “He who controls the fear of the people becomes the master of their souls.”

This tool of manipulation, which allows for the suppression of all critical thinking and the exploitation of public credulity by keeping people ignorant of essential facts about life, has always been used, but now it operates on a much larger scale thanks to multiple means of dissemination. Religions have taught us to believe in dogmas without seeking to understand them. We persist in applying this well-established rule by heeding the injunctions of despots, no longer religious, certainly, but just as tyrannical. And current medical dogmatism could be compared to the practices of the Inquisition, which burned everything that exceeded its understanding or could jeopardize the hegemony of the Catholic Church.

[sic: Regarding the H1N1 flu] While the majority of the world’s population resisted government and media threats, hundreds of thousands of people nevertheless rushed to vaccination centers, reaching for the venerated needle as if it were the Holy Sacrament, without questioning the sanctity of the rite, trusting only the high priests of the vaccine religion who wanted to protect them from the devil’s attacks, in this case, the flu virus. Rites and dogmas endure; only the gods we worship and the devil we fear have changed their faces.

Of course, no one said that the devil was fabricated by pontiffs in the pay of industry who had been threatening us for several years with a flu “pandemic,” without really knowing which one. […] But to be free,