The design of medicine

Is conventional medicine synergetic?

Let's do our little analysis according to the 7 criteria retained:

• Its effectiveness is mediocre, if not bad. If it were true that recent health improvements in Western history were legitimately attributable to it, I would have requalified this statement, but simple research on the topic shows that the more conventional medicine progresses, the sicker we are, and that the results and statistics are far too doctored to be trustworthy. Moreover, there are many cases of medical errors and failure to treat patients. The diagnostic tools used are sometimes faulty, and the care pathways gives rise to countless side effects and nosocomial diseases.

• Its accessibility is very poor, because the patents registered on the drugs make their access fragile and sometimes even impossible, the substances used can be rare and not very accessible, finally the prices charged are prohibitive, and if some countries do not realize it through their own social security system, this does not take away the fact that it is the community which pays the delirious prices which are practised in medicine.

• It is not at all transparent, because we often do not know what the drugs are made of, either because of patents or because the information is not communicated and remains obscured by terms that are not easily understood by the layman. In addition, contracted physicians tend to protect each other, and medical errors are rarely established with the transparency they would require. Statistics are often fudged and poorly communicated, legitimate questions from the public often go unanswered, the manufacturers of poisonous drugs that cause many deaths and illnesses are never questioned as a whole, and their institutions are never called into question because of a deliberate denial of medical and legal information.

• It is not very predictable, given the innumerable side effects that the proposed drugs generate, and this in a partially probabilistic way, and a partially unpredictable way for the patient (some labs hide the studies showing excessive side effects in order to guarantee the marketing of the poison).

• It is not simple. It is enough to refer to the indexes of diseases, disorders and drugs to understand that it is the infinity of symptoms and substances that predominates, leading doctors to rely on prescription software for years, without having to show any medical competence themselves.

• It is only partly reversible, meaning that some unwanted effects can disappear by themselves or be removed. But, in many cases, unreversibility of certain processes show an accumulation of side-effects, sometimes leading little by little to a terrible health. Some medical-induced diseases or troubles are definitive and one of the most famous conventional process, the vaccination, often deteriorate our health for our entire life.

• It is not very satisfactory. It is true that, overall, we see people placing a great deal of trust in the conventional medical world, but we also see thousands of complaints, sometimes brought to court, victims' associations being formed and, more generally, the state of health of the population deteriorating little by little. A medicine worthy of the name could not generate so many diseases and health disorders and could deal with common health issues with no hesitation. It is also a sure thing that many people satisfied with the current state of the medical art simply don't know what it means to be healthy (like someone who have eaten industrial junk food his whole life doesn't know what a synergetic food is and how it tastes)

So: no, conventional medicine is not synergetic, by far. Its only special interest is in emergency management, which has led some people to rightly call it war medicine. However, even in this area, there is much room for improvement in the situation and treatment of problems. Let us see how.

Caring for others must be a vocation that stands on its own

The first major flaw of the current health care system is its profit-making nature. The temptation to use the suffering of others to maximize profits is obviously too present in today's humanity not to advocate that health and money be forever uncorrelated.

A doctor who practices medicine with the monetary reward in mind is not able to practice his art properly and opens the door to corruption (which is now in the vast majority in our time, whether doctors admit it or not, and they do not admit it).

Then comes the glorification of the profession, which is also alien to the principles of health. The only glorification a physician should seek is the success of his care. Surrounding the medical professions with an abundance of advantages acquired by status, reputation, admiration, and the like, can only drive some unqualified people down this path, and also open the door to corruption, abuse of power and the delusional infatuation of the practitioners' ego.

How then can we guarantee that doctors and caregivers get a decent income for their work? There are two options, which are better from the current one, but not perfect:

• Practicing free donation, which is traditionally done in Asia and which can only work in a culture where donation is common and sufficiently abundant for doctors to work as needed.

• Socializing (1) medicine and maintain the use of public money without corruption and according to the needs of the doctors, without exaggerating the income of some or others.

Furthermore, and this is a central point that can only be truly addressed in a society with strong values: the doctor’s true reward must be the good health of his patients.

It is also appropriate to promote a method of remuneration for physicians based on the quality of their patients' health, and not on the number of procedures performed.

You can condemn to disability a person you operate on 100 times, it is not the quantity that counts, if it was necessary to remind it...

This approach is apparently also traditionally present in Asia, such as in India or China. However, these countries should not be seen as perfect models, they also have major medical deficiencies and practitioners who genuinely apply the medical tradition, supposedly pure of greed and pride, are in reality extremely rare.

Reforming medicine

I have said that conventional medicine is not at all synergetic and that certain prerequisites are necessary to promote the devotion of doctors to their patients, rather than to their bank accounts or their pride.

That's a start, but what kind of medicine should be offered then? What synergetic medicine could lead us to better overall health and minimize corruption within it?

The effective medicines of today are different from the incessant broth of conventional medicine, which is mostly able to accumulate symptomatic observations and supposedly curative chemicals.

Among these is Ayurveda, the traditional Indian medicine which is in fact originally the traditional medicine of the Aryan peoples who lived from Europe to Asia between 8000 and 1000 BC. It is from this same tradition that ancient Chinese, Babylonian, ancient Jewish, Egyptian, ancient Greek and Druidic medicines come from.

They are more or less the same medicines:

• their approach is holistic and alchemical, everything is about balance and imbalance

• they focus on diet, sleep, physical exercises, psychology and meditation

• they admit spirituality and see the human being as a set of components that go beyond the purely material framework

• they consider each individual as unique and work "in a funnel": from the global human functioning to the particular case of the patient

• they make correspondences between diseases, organs, nutrition, astrology, destiny, physiological nature, etc.

• they work first by prevention and then by intervention, if necessary

• money does not interfere in their practice nor in their teaching

• they do not patent anything and do not hide their knowledge

• they rely on medicines that are not very transformed (water, animals, plants, metals, minerals) and accessible

• their diagnosis is non-invasive: pulse, eyes, tongue, skin, urine, stool

• the responsibility of health is equitably shared between the patient who makes efforts to heal and the practitioner who makes a point of mastering his art and bringing his patients to healing

Putting this type of medicine back at the center of health would be of great benefit to humanity.

(Note that homeopathy and anthroposophical medicine are younger cousins of these ancient medicines).

Also, it is possible to add more recent medical advances such as bioresonance machines (see Antonio Priore), thermal cures, dynamized water, osteopathy, and others.

The important thing is to keep the synergetic criteria as a guideline:

• the effectiveness of medicine must be proven and constantly observed (with reliable studies forming a serious statistical corpus)

• it must be accessible (no limiting patents, no rare substances) and made free of charge by socializing its costs as well as by making the community responsible for it (limiting expenses to what is strictly necessary, preventing addiction to drugs and doctors, preventing waste)

• it must be totally transparent, documented and based on the principles of open science, its teaching must be free

• it must be predictable in the sense that its practices must have been tested thousands of times without any surprise in the observed effects

• it must remain as simple as possible, as long as it is effective, and any patient with normal cognitive faculties must be able to understand how he is being treated and with what

• all treatments must, as far as possible, be reversible, if it turns out that a medical error has been committed, the medical procedures used must not be able to prevent the error from being repaired

• synergetic medicine must really contribute to people's contentment, through strong and lasting health, and the assurance that it is and remains trustworthy

Do things in order

What can we do to promote the advent of a new medicine, more synergetic than the current conventional medicine?

It is important to put our goals back in reality and to observe where we can act and what is more of a distant goal whose realization in our world should not be expected for tomorrow.

First of all it would be necessary, as much as possible, to question everything. Sometimes, being paranoid can save lives and I am not joking.

Then, it is very important to not be vaccinated any more (or, at least, for the people not sure about what to do on that matter, to take the time to dig the subject on every vaccine and sort out what is true seek for health and what is about profit and control).

It may frighten people who have endured the relentless medical propaganda of the past 150 years to rethink this subject, but vaccination appears to be an ineffective and dangerous process, dooming many people who has undergone it to poor health.

Having a decent lifestyle, a healthy and balanced diet and a calm mind are more than enough to solve 99,99% of health issues. The concern is that, by the systematization of vaccination, we no longer know what it is to be healthy. And we can add to that the possibility that traumatic events (murders, wars, agressions of all sort) exaggerate in our lineblood some symptoms (a field of research often called transgenerational health).

By the way, on the subject of vaccines, I recommend the readings of Dissolving Illusions by Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk and Murder by Injection by Eustace Mullins. Not to take as granted, but useful to open our mind to what is possibly a giant health scam.

Then, it is imperative to consult reliable doctors, knowledgeable in diet such as Ayurveda doctors, naturopaths, Chinese medicine practitioners or Druids (there are very few left).

Competent practitioners are difficult to find and it is important, when a competent person is "detected" to ensure that they can treat and teach as much as they wish.

We are responsible for our personal health but we are also responsible for how true care is known and applied. We can help improve the health of the public by carrying out our own communication and by helping worthy practitioners to come forward and practice.

So, following the advice of a professionnal, modify our diet according to which seems the most suitable for us.

Do daily physical exercises.

Find out about and protect ourself from the nuisances caused by electromagnetic waves, the effects of which are disastrous on health and the brain (I invite everyone to go to white areas and observe how their thoughts become clearer and some of their uncomfortable sensations vanish).

Finally, promote and further promote what seems to be the ultimate medicine and which is able to respect the aforementioned criteria: effectiveness, accessibility, transparency, predictability, simplicity, reversibility, contentment. This also means to give free access to the knowledge with the appropriated licenses (ideally the CC BY-NC from the Creative Commons Foundation, that prevents commercial use of the published elements).

And promotion include of course creating places and ways of living an almost normal life in society without having to follow conventional medical diktats. For example, not being vaccinated or not vaccinate our children can be tricky as everything is done to prevent unvaccinated people from accessing common benefits and social life. Same goes for people that don’t want to live surrounded by artificial electromagnetic waves, because of the choice of many governments to not let a single region in their country free of artificial EMF (electromagnetic field).

It is therefore important to imagine and create solutions for healthy people to have the right to live happily and share their knowledge about health.

So, to sum up:

• question everything, especially vaccination

• check our diet

• do physical exercise

• protect ourselves from electromagnetic pollution

• promote the right practices and manage places accordingly

Short testimony

Some people might wonder: how is he so sure of himself?

Indeed, my recommendations seem radical and may worry uninformed people.

Don't just take my word for it, do your own research (2). Even if it is hard, long and we are never sure that the data is not faked.

Some people may find it easier to trust their intuition. Indeed, an abundance of falsified data harms science. It's a real problem. Also, we will judge the tree by its fruits.

For my part, I have evolved in the world of so-called "alternative" medicines for more than ten years. We can find everything there, true and false, fake practicioners and competent ones.

I have seen dozens of cases of very successful healing, by simple, healthy means, without side effects, without relapses and in a very humane and fast way. Some of these healings concerned very serious health issues like cancer, schizophrenia, bone defects or depression.

It's not a fantasy, the solutions exist, some of them for millenia, and it's up to us to sort the wheat from the chaff in every field (be it conventional medicine or so-called alternative ones) and spread the information as much as possible (preferably without going religious about it), because the medical industry moguls won't and even, will do everything to prevent it from being known.

That's how it is, that's the game. It's up to us.