A conservative estimate of 250,000 deaths are directly caused by hospitals and medical practitioners per year. I tentatively say "conservative" as this figure is put forth by the Journal of the American Medical Association, who, by no means, have any interest in reporting a high statistic of death caused by modern American medical practices. If we are to accept this figure, though...this would make the third leading cause of death in the United States, the very people and institutions who are entrusted to save lives...not end them.

While people generally focus their health concerns on worries of being diagnosed with cancer or heart disease or some ailment which decreases the quality of their lives, they are relatively unconcerned with the third most likely cause of their own future demise when they choose to put their lives in the hands of the medical industry. In any other profession which renders a service...should that service be found to be greatly wanting in results as provided by any certain company or establishment, people would simply drive that establishment out of business by refusing their patronage. Other, more effective providers of said service would instead dominate the market. The only time this is not the case is when there is a monopoly and competition doesn't exist.

By definition, what is available for medical care in the US and most of the industrialized world is a monopoly. People are not given a reasonable choice of how they would like their physical health to be treated...there is a single recognized way of dealing with disease..cut, burn and drug. Anything outside of this standard is denied funding and insurance coverage and therefor is rarely available and when it is... it is beyond the means of the average person to pay for. There is nonetheless, an almost worshipful sense of respect for what amounts to a quack practice sold at insanely high rates to a generation of people who forgot what it means to come to some common sense conclusions.

It would be common sense enough to term the medical system "greedy"...their highly lucrative practice provides the only "acceptable" answer to physical ailment as far as most people are concerned. The demand for medical help will never decrease, especially if the medical practice itself continues in a mode of operation which doesn't cure disease, but hides symptoms, allowing the disease and thus the need for treatment to continue. Greed can only half address this atrocity though. If it were only about profits, the medical profession would likely be more concerned that they are killing off so many of their fine customers before they had outlived their full potential to rake in the cash.

So then..they mean to kill off some people. That might come as a wildly controversial statement, but backing it up is only a short trek down history lane to the advent of the modern medical profession as it exits today.

In 1902, an infamous associate of John D Rockefeller named Andrew Carnegie founded the Carnegie Institute which became the central funding for the Eugenics Records Office in Cold Spring Harbor, New York. A dark era in American history which gets very little attention in public school classes these days...the policies of this organization led directly to the forced sterilization of thousands of US citizens.

"The endeavors of the Eugenics Record Office were facilitated by the work of various committees. The Committee on Inheritance of Mental Traits included among its members Robert M. Yerkes and Edward L. Thorndike. The Committee on Heredity of Deafmutism included Alexander Graham Bell. Harry H. Laughlin was on the Committee on Sterilization, and the Committee on the Heredity of the Feeble Minded included, among others, Henry Herbert Goddard. Other prominent board members included scientists like Irving Fisher, William E. Castle, and Adolf Meyer.

The ERO advocated for laws that led to the forced sterilization of many Americans deemed "feebleminded"."


The ERO archives - http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/list3.pl

In 1910 Abraham Flexner, a John Hopkins, Harvard University and University of Berlin graduate was employed by the Carnegie institute to draft what became known as the "Flexner Report". This was an epic of a paper which suggested that American medical schools needed to be held to a universal standard. A standard which would encompass admission into medical school, the education received and ensured that government would oversee the regulation of the practice in general, subjecting al medical schools to state regulation.

The policies put forth in this paper, backed by Carnegie and Rockefeller funding became the protocols of the medical profession which are in place to this day. Nearly all medical schools were closed down as a result of these standards, leaving only those behind who would adhere to the ideals outlined by the Flexner Report. The result was that, being few in number, doctors were in high demand, the medical profession became a very highly paid one and one which had no flexibility of choice in how to approach cures and treatments.

When this point in history is recalled to mind by those who defend the mainstream practice of medicine it is often noted that unstandardized healthcare resulted in individuals who were not held to any quality of service and therefor could have practices which persisted in unsanitary or unsafe conditions run by uneducated practitioners. While that is surely not untrue, it also assumes that the average person in search of medical care is not intelligent enough to avoid what is obviously unsanitary and unsafe practices by way of simple observation. It ignores also that people will not continue to patronize an establishment which has a well known reputation for a lack of quality results or that conversely they will not naturally gravitate to those establishments which do provide good results. As a consequence, what is left is a standardized monopoly which can be both unsanitary and unsafe with no repercussions.

Eugenics and the furthering of sciences which upheld the belief in the removal of the "unfit" masses was the foundation of the conception for this monopoly in medicine. Every individual and organization which backed the standardized medical practices of today were staunch and outspoken supporters of the kind of Social Darwinism that Hitler was only a Johnny-come-lately in. These ideals were solidly a part of the American "elite" dream.

"Leading eugenicists were greatly challenged when it came to funding because the U.S.
Federal Government did not support basic science research studies until after the Second World War. Instead, state universities and philanthropists took the leading role in the movement’s funding.Most notable were three well-known figures of the day, Mrs. E.H. Harriman, Andrew Carnegie, and John D. Rockefeller. Together, their institutions would fund nearly every aspect of the movement including the educational portion, which trained office and field workers and awarded scholarships so young people could spend their summers training and studying in human heredity and field research

It is clear that without the backing of rich elite in both capital and in name, the eugenics movement would not have had the financial stability or the assurance of the public to exist as a large-scale entity". - Nicholas R. Scott


http://studentorgs.umf.maine.edu/aio/public.www/historian/vol2iss2/...

It is a spirit of fear which pervades throughout the modern culture of the industrialized world which will not allow the common man to question those who are presented as his greatest benefactors though they prove themselves to be murderers. Given all angles of the information available which concludes at a point that is hard to deny, most will still obstinately resist taking in and digesting the idea of there being a medical profession which is designed to carry out culling on the population. It is the terror of feeling as if there is nowhere left to turn should one's health fail that will drive people to hold desperately to the notion that there is benevolence at work in mainstream medicine.

People do have some power in this matter though....people do still have the ability to boycott the services which are as likely to end their life as a massive coronary. Educating ones self is still free...nature and the remedies our Creator provided are still free....and people CAN be free of a long standing tyranny over their own bodies.

Views: 91

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

My husband was office manager in a car repair shop for many years and he always joked that doctors and lawyers are the only two professions that are allowed to "practice".
Exactly...if an auto mechanic "practiced" fixing cars how quickly would they go out of business?
And, another small sharing of a set of facts:

Number of physicians in the U.S.: 700,000
Number of accidental deaths caused by physicians each year: 120,000
Accidental deaths per physician: 0.171
(courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health & Human Services)

Number of gun owners in the U.S.: 80 million
Number of accidental deaths per year for all age groups: 1500

"Think before going pink: Many breast cancer awareness sponsors profit from cancer

As we find ourselves once again awash in a sea of pink for Breast Cancer Awareness Month (BCAM), few people who participate, donate or buy pink-themed products are aware that BCAM has always been a deliberate deception - a "pinkwash" which helps "do-gooder" sponsors hide their own culpability while promoting products which cause cancer.

"In the beginning
Breast Cancer Awareness Month (BCAM) was launched in 1987 by Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), a British chemical company which has been a world leader in manufacturing cancer-causing pesticides, plastics and other products. From day one, ICI and later spin-off Zeneca have used BCAM to direct research and prevention efforts away from chemical carcinogens...

Examples of BCAM sponsors who promote cancer causing products:

General Electric (GE)

GE, a major polluter of carcinogenic PCBs in a 200 mile stretch of the Hudson River, sells upwards of $100 million annually in mammography machines. BCAM emphasizes encouraging yearly mammograms. The trademark slogan is "Early Detection is Your Best Prevention." Though it is too late to prevent cancer once it has been detected, 37 percent of American women believe that mammograms somehow prevent breast cancer.

While mammograms have never prevented a single instance of cancer, radiation from routine mammography causes tens of thousands of cases of breast cancer each year. The National Cancer Institute reports that mammography may cause 75 cases of breast cancer for every 15 it identifies in younger women. Additionally, mammograms misidentify tumors 70 percent of the time, resulting in huge numbers of unnecessary and invasive biopsies.

Monsanto

Biotech giant Monsanto is a major sponsor BCAM's high profile event, the Race for the Cure. At the same time, Monsanto reaps huge profits from products which cause breast and other cancers. A study published in the October, 2012 edition of the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology provided unprecedented evidence of the cancer causing dangers of the combination of Monsanto's genetically modified corn and it's herbicide Roundup.

Cow's treated with Monsanto's genetically engineered rBGH growth hormone produce milk with up to 10 times the normal Insulin-like Growth Factor I (IGF-1). IGF-1 has been identified as a leading risk factor for breast cancer as well as other cancers. Studies have shown that women with elevated levels of IGF-1 are seven times more likely to develop pre-menopausal breast cancer.

DuPont

DuPont, another huge chemical company and major polluter, supplies much of the film used in mammography machines. Like GE, DuPont aggressively promotes mammography screening of women in their 40s, despite the risk of its contributing to breast cancer in that age group..."

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037421_breast_cancer_pink_ribbons_sponso...



Horror as patient wakes up in NY hospital with doctors trying to harvest her organs for transplant profits

"I've warned Natural News readers about this several times over the last decade: Do NOT become an organ donor! Although you may wish to help others out of the goodness of your (literal) heart, the sinister truth is that doctors routinely harvest organs from LIVING patients right here in the USA.

And here's yet more proof. This true story will astound you.

Waking up on the organ harvesting table...
A woman named Colleen Burns recently opened her eyes to find herself on an operating table in a hospital in Syracuse, NY. Looking around, she noticed that she was the subject of the operation. It turns out doctors were about to harvest her organs and send them to other waiting surgeons who would transplant them into other patients.

This isn't fiction. It was covered by ABC News and several other news sources. It really happened.

And how did it happen? Doctors falsely pronounced her dead by fraudulently claiming she had suffered "cardiopulmonary arrest" and "irreversible brain damage." This gave them the medical justification to start slicing away even while the woman's heart was still beating.

This is a big "holy crap I didn't know that" fact about organ donations: Doctors don't wait until you're really dead. At least not by any normal definition of "dead."

See, you and I think "dead" means your heart isn't beating, your brain isn't functioning, and you're lifeless. But hospitals -- which happen to generate huge profits from the trade of transplant organs -- have a strong financial incentive to declare you "medically dead" long before you're actually lifeless.

They can, in fact, declare you "dead" even when your heart is still beating and you still have brain activity. And they often do. This is how a lot of the organ harvesting in America actually gets done: patients that are on the verge of death (but not yet actually dead) are simply "declared" dead, then their organs are quickly removed, killing them for good.

It's a crime that takes place every day in America, where U.S. hospitals have been caught over and over again engaging in black market organ trafficking.

Read: U.S. Hospitals Secretly Promote Black Market Trading of Harvested Organs for Transplants

A multi-billion-dollar industry
Organ trafficking is a multi-billion-dollar industry. Wealthy people around the world are always in need of new kidneys, new livers, new hearts and other body parts.

And guess who makes the money on all these organ transplants? The doctors, hospitals and drug companies, of course. Organ transplants are a hugely profitable industry -- largely because they get the organs for free. Patients who are killed by these doctors are never paid for their organs. The fact that they "donate" them actually means they are donating their immensely valuable organs to a for-profit system that's going to earn potentially millions of dollars off the organs of a single donor.

So while the donor patient gets murdered for his or her organs, the doctors engaged in organ removal and organ transplants get wealthy. Transplant recipients and health insurance companies pay huge dollars for organ transplant surgeries, and the profits are ongoing because transplant recipients must also pay for a long course of organ transplant anti-rejection drugs, all priced at monopoly prices (of course).

Truth be told, the organ transplant industry is all about money -- at any cost. It's about killing patients who might otherwise survive in order to take their organs and make millions of dollars transplanting them into other patients... patients who typically only have a few months to live even after the transplant.

Read: Global organ harvesting a booming black market business; a kidney harvested every hour.

Transplanted organs are often damaged or infested with disease
Here's another dirty little trick the organ transplant industry will never tell you: The organs that are transplanted into other patients are often fatally damaged and full of infectious diseases.

As yet more proof of this, take the case of Colleen Burns, mentioned above. She tried to commit suicide by taking a toxic combination of prescription medications. According to the doctors, this toxic cocktail of chemicals was fatal, and it killed her (they pronounced her dead).

Yet, simultaneously, they still insisted her organs were healthy enough to transplant into another patient! That's why they almost began harvesting them.

In other words, even organs that doctors know are heavily damaged with toxic chemical cocktails will still be transplanted into other patients! (This is 100% true.)

But it's even worse than that...

Transplant organs often riddled with disease: hepatitis, stealth viruses, mad cow disease and more
There are effectively zero quality standards in the organ transplant industry. If the organ still functions at any level, it's "good enough" to be slapped into a transplant patient even though that organ might actually kill them.

One of the reasons organ transplant patients often die so quickly after receiving transplants is because the organs they often receive are ticking time bombs of disease.

Introducing a diseased heart or kidney into someone's body, for example, can suddenly infest that person with hundreds or even thousands of viruses and blood-borne illnesses that quickly overcome their weakened immune systems. This is made even worse by the anti-rejection drugs which, by definition, cause extreme suppression of immune function.

So at the exact time that new diseases are being introduced into the transplant recipient's body, their immune system is being undermined by anti-rejection drugs. Not surprisingly, this is a recipe for disaster, and that's one reason why so many patients die so quickly after receiving "donor" organs.

Iraq war veteran killed by cancer-ridden transplant lungs
As an example of what I just described above, in 2009, an Iraq war veteran named Matthew Millington was given a lung transplant using lungs that were riddled with a fast-growing cancer.

Not surprisingly, he died less than 10 months later. Did all the organ transplant doctors and surgeons give him a refund for their botched procedure? Of course not! Organ transplants do not come with warranties, and you're often given a diseased, damaged or heavily infested organ that's going to kill you. (But you still gotta pay up!)

There are roughly 100,000 people waiting for organ transplants in the USA right now. But there are only a fraction of that number of organs available in any given year, so doctors are under intense pressure to 1) harvest organs from people who aren't yet dead, and 2) use ANY organs they can find, even organs that are riddled with disease.

Again, these are the dirty little secrets of the organ transplant industry that you'll never be told by any doctor. Expect to hear nothing but denials if you ask organ transplant doctors about any of this.

More healthy organ donors "need to suddenly die"
The other challenge the transplant industry faces is that healthy people who take care of their organs through nutrition and exercise simply don't tend to die very often. The kind of people most likely to die (and therefore most like to donate organs) are alcoholics, drug addicts and people who are obese and diseased. Therefore, those are the kind of organs that end up being available for transplant: nasty "fatty" livers and cancerous lungs, for example.

Ideally, the organ transplant industry would like to see a lot of young, healthy people getting decapitated in military training exercises or automobile accidents. That would supply a fresh supply of healthy organs that might actually be worth transplanting. In China, of course, this is why Falun Gong members are routinely arrested and imprisoned: they eat super-healthy diets and so have high-grade organs that can be profitably harvested from political prisoners there.

The practice of arresting people, imprisoning them and sometimes even murdering them for their organs is a lot more widespread than you think. How do you suppose Steve Jobs got a new liver so quickly, even while thousands of other people were waiting for one? He bought it. Gee, do you really think Steve Jobs stood in line like everyone else and then magically a liver appeared for him much faster than for anyone else?..."

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/041152_transplant_patients_organ_harvest...


For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood...  Lev 17:11

...and if that life, that person, had spiritual attachments, and/or rights were held over that life, over that person, by spiritual entities -- all that goes with the organ, the blood, as well. the people who agree to donate organs are in physical danger, and those who agree to receive donated organs are in spiritual danger.

Dean Smith

http://opentheword.org/2013/07/10/this-is-disturbing/

There have been a number of instances where patients declared brain-dead by physicians have recovered. In England, a father saved his 17-year-old son from a similar plight. Steven Thorpe was severely injured in a car accident and put into a medically induced coma. Four attending doctors said he was brain dead and suggested Steven be taken off life support and his organs harvested. But his parents did not cave to the pressure.

When Steven’s father was able to get a second opinion from another neurologist — who believed there was still brain activity — the hospital agreed to bring his son out of the coma. Two weeks later, Steven regained consciousness and five weeks after that walked out of the hospital. In 2012, Stephen was enrolled in university studying to be an accountant.

Can we really transplant a human soul?

http://theunexplainedmysteries.com/human-soul.html

...donor patients could not only be acquiring the organs but also the memories - or even the soul - of the donor is surely one such story. This bizarre possibility was raised by the inexplicable case of Sonny Graham - a seemingly happily married 69-year-old man living in the U.S. state of Georgia. He shot himself without warning, having shown no previous signs of unhappiness, let alone depression. His friends described it as an act of passion, not of reason.

The case might have remained just an isolated tragedy were it not for the fact that Sonny had received a transplanted heart from a man who had also shot himself - in identical circumstances. To make things even more intriguing, shortly after receiving the heart transplant, Sonny tracked down the wife of the donor - and fell instantly in love with her. "When I first met her," Sonny told a local newspaper, "I just stared. I felt like I had known her for years. I couldn't keep my eyes off her."

Inherited Memory in Organ Transplant Recipients

http://theophanes.hubpages.com/hub/Cellular-Memories-in-Organ-Trans...

Most examples of cellular memory in transplant patients are recorded by scientists doing studies, with the aid of a hospital system that forbids the transplantee to know or speak to the donor's family. Because of this most of the cases are written of without the use of names, leaving these patients stories at large but still in obscurity.

One of the few cases we know the patient's name was a woman called Claire Sylvia who received a heart and lung transplant in the 1970's from an eighteen year old male donor who had been in a motorcycle accident. None of this information was known to Sylvia, who upon waking up claimed she had a new and intense craving for beer, chicken nuggets, and green peppers, all food she didn't enjoy prior to the surgery. A change in food preferences is probably the most noted in heart transplant patients. Sylvia wrote a book about her experiences after learning the identity of her donor called A Change of Heart.

Other documented cases have been perplexing and sometimes extreme. A 47 year old man receiving a heart from a 17 year old black boy suddenly picked up an intense fondness for classical music. The boy whose heart had been donated was killed in a drive-by shooting, still clutching his violin case in his hands. A 47 year old transplant patient claimed that his new heart was responsible for a sudden onset of eating disorders, heralded from the heart's previous owner, a 14 year old girl. Once a change in sexual orientation was even documented in a twenty seven year old lesbian who soon after getting a new heart settled down and married a man.

The most stunning example of cellular memory was found in an eight year old girl who received the heart of a ten year old girl. The recipient was plagued after surgery with vivid nightmares about an attacker and a girl being murdered. After being brought to a psychiatrist her nightmares proved to be so vivid and real that the psychiatrist believed them to be genuine memories. As it turns out the ten year old whose heart she had just received was murdered and due to the recipients violent reoccurring dreams she was able to describe the events of that horrible encounter and the murderer so well that police soon apprehended, arrested, and convicted the killer.

"is this because he's got one of those silly cards?"

Reply to Discussion

RSS

© 2021   Created by Cyprium.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service