Category: Shifting Perspectives Views: 993
The practice of medicine may not be the world’s oldest profession, but it is often seen to be operating on much the same principles. Not only does the client wonder if he is getting what he is paying for, but in many instances, he is dismayed to find that he has actually gotten something he had not bargained for. An examination of the record shows that the actual methods of medical practice have not changed that much through the eons. The recently discovered Ebers papyrus shows that as early as 1600 B.C., more than nine hundred prescriptions were available to the physician, including opium as a pain-killing drug. As late as 1700, commonly used medications included cathartics such as senna, aloe, figs and castor oil. Intestinal worms were treated by aspidium roots (the male fern), pomegranate bark, or wormseed oil. In the East this was obtained from the flowers of santonin; in the Western Hemisphere it was pressed from the fruit and leaves of chenopodium.
Analgesics or pain relievers were alcohol, hyoscyamus leaves, and opium. Hyoscyamus contains scopolamine, used to induce “twilight sleep” in modern medicine. In the sixteenth century, Arabs used colchicum, a saffron derivative, for rheumatic pains and gout. Cinchona bark, the source of quinine, was used to treat malaria; chaulmoogra oil was used for leprosy, and ipecac for amoebic dysentery. Burned sponge at one time was used as a treatment for goiter; its content of iodine provided the cure. Midwives used ergot to contract the uterus. Some two hundred years ago, the era of modern medicine was ushered in by Sir Humphry Davy’s discovery of the anaesthetic properties of nitrous oxide. Michael Faraday discovered ether, and Wilhelm Surtner isolated morphine from opium.
Until the late nineteenth century, doctors practiced as free lance agents, which meant that they assumed all the risks of their decisions. The poor rarely encountered a doctor, as medical ministrations were generally confined to the rich and powerful. Curing a monarch could bring great rewards but failing to cure him could be a fatal mistake. Perhaps it was the awareness of the personal risks of this profession which gave rise to the plan for monopoly, to level out the risks and rewards among a chosen few. The attempts to build up this medical monopoly have now created a modern plague, while the resolve to maintain this monopoly has cost the public dearly in money and suffering.
Almost five centuries ago, one of the first attempts to set up this monopoly took place in England. The Act of 1511, signed into law by King Henry the Eighth, in England, made it an offence to practice physic or surgery without the approval of a panel of “experts.” This Act was formalized in 1518 with the founding of the Royal College of Physicians. In 1540, barbers and surgeons were granted similar powers, when the King granted approval of their company. They immediately launched a campaign to eliminate the unauthorized practitioners who had served the poor. Apparently there is nothing new under the sun, as much the same campaign has long been underway in the United States. This harassment of doctors who served the poor caused such widespread suffering in England that King Henry the 8th was forced to enact the Quacks Charter in 1542. This Charter exempted the “unauthorized practitioners” and allowed them to continue their ministrations. No such charter has ever been granted in the United States, where a “quack” is not only an unauthorized practitioner, that is, one who has not been “approved” by the American Medical Association or one of the government agencies under its control, but he is also subject to immediate arrest. It is interesting that the chartering of quacks is not one of the features of English life which was passed on to its American colony.
In 1617, the Society of Apothecaries was formed in England. In 1832, the British Medical Association was chartered; this became the impetus for the forming of a similar association, the American Medical Association, in the United States. From its earliest inception, the American Medical Association has had one principal objective, attaining and defending a total monopoly of the practice of medicine in the United States. From its outset, the AMA made allopathy the basis of its practice. Allopathy was a type of medicine whose practitioners had received training in a recognized academic school of medicine, and who relied heavily on surgical procedures and the use of medications. The leaders of this brand of medicine had been trained in Germany. They were dedicated to the frequent use of bleeding and heavy doses of drugs. They were inimical to any form of medicine which had not proceeded from the academies and which did not follow standardized or orthodox procedures.
Allopathy set up an intense rivalry with the prevalent nineteenth school of medicine, the practice of homeopathy. This school was the creation of a doctor named Christian Hahnemann (1755-1843). It was based on his formula, “similibus cyrentur,” like cures like. Homeopathy is of even greater significance to our time, because it works through the immune system, using nontoxic doses of substances which are similar to those causing the illness. Even today, Queen Elizabeth is still treated by her personal homeopathic physician at Buckingham Palace. Yet, in the United States, organized medicine continues its frenetic drive to discredit and stamp out the practice of homeopathic medicine. Ironically, Dr. George H. Simmons, who dominated the American Medical Association from 1899 to 1924, building that organization into a national power, had for years run advertisements in Lincoln, Nebraska, where he practiced, which proclaimed that he was a “homeopathic physician.”
Clinical trials have shown that homeopathy is as effective as certain widely prescribed arthritic drugs, and also having the overriding advantage that it produces no harmful side effects. However, the accomplishments of homeopathy have historically been given the silent treatment, or, if mentioned at all, were greatly misinterpreted or distorted. A classic case of this technique occurred in England during the devastating outbreak of cholera in 1854; records showed that during this epidemic, deaths at homeopathic hospitals were only 16.4%, as compared to the death rate of 50% at the orthodox medical hospitals. This record was deliberately suppressed by the Board of Health of the City of London.
During the nineteenth century, the practice of homeopathy spread rapidly throughout the United States and Europe. Dr. Hahnemann had written a textbook, “Homeopathica Materia Medica,” which enabled many practitioners to adopt his methods.
In 1847, when the American Medical Association was founded in the United States, homeopaths outnumbered allopaths, the AMA type of doctors, by more than two to one. Because of the individualistic nature of the homeopathic profession, and the fact that they usually practiced alone, they were unprepared for the concerted onslaught of the allopaths. From its beginning, the AMA proved that it was merely a trade lobby, which had been organized for the purpose of stifling competition and driving the homeopaths out of business. By the early 1900s, as the AMA began to achieve this goal, American medicine began to enter its Dark Age. Only now is it beginning to emerge from those decades of darkness, as a new, holistic movement calls for treating the entire physical system, instead of concentrating on one affected part.
A distinctive feature of the AMA’s allopathic school of medicine was its constant self-advertisement and promotion of a myth, the myth that its type of medicine was the only one which was effective. This pernicious development created a new monster, the mad doctor as a person of absolute infallibility, whose judgment must never be questioned. Most certainly, his mistakes must never be mentioned. As Ivan Ilyich has pointed out in his shocking book, “Medical Nemesis, the Expropriation of Health” (1976), not only has the effectiveness of the allopathic school of medicine proved to be the stuff of mythology, but the doctors have now brought new plagues into being, illnesses which Ilyich defines as “iatrogenic,” causing a plague which he terms “iatrogenesis.” Ilyich claims that this plague is now sweeping this nation. He defines iatrogenesis as an “illness which is caused by a doctor’s medical intervention.” Ilyich goes on to define three commonly encountered types of iatrogenesis; clinical iatrogenesis, which is a doctor-made illness; social iatrogenesis, which is deliberately created by the machinations of the medical-industrial complex; and cultural types of iatrogenesis, the third may be the most prevalent. Advertisements for various medications call it “stress,” the difficulty of surmounting the problems of every day life which are caused by the totalitarian government and the sinister figures behind it, who operate it for their own personal gain. Confronted with this monstrous presence, which intrudes into every aspect of an American citizen’s daily life, many people are overcome by a feeling of hopelessness, and are persuaded that there is nothing they can do. In fact, this monster is extremely vulnerable, because it is so greatly overextended, and when attacked, can be seen to be a paper tiger.
Despite the AMA’s frenetic claims of improving medical care, records show that the state of American health is declining. During the nineteenth century, it had shown steady improvement, probably because of the ministrations of the homeopaths. A typical disease of the period was tuberculosis. In 1812, the death rate from tuberculosis in New York was 700 per 100,000. When Koch isolated the bacillus in 1882, this death rate had already declined to 370. In 1910, when the first TB sanitarium was opened, this rate had further declined to 180 per 100,000. By 1950, this death rate had dropped to 50 per 100,000. Medical records prove that a 90% decline in child mortality from scarlet fever, diptheria, whooping cough and measles occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and immunization, from 1860-1896. This was also well before the Food and Drug Act was passed in 1905, which set up governmental control of interstate commerce in drugs. In 1900, there was only one doctor for every 750 Americans. They had usually served a two year apprenticeship, after which they could look forward to earning about the same salary as a good mechanic. In 1900, the AMA Journal, which was already under the editorship of Dr. George H. Simmons, sounded the call to arms. “The growth of the profession must be stemmed if individual members are to find the practice of medicine a lucrative profession.” One would find difficulty in reading in the literature of any profession a more determined demand for monopoly. But how was this goal to be achieved? The Merlin who was to wave his magic wand and bring about this dramatic development in the medical profession turned out to be none other than the richest man in the world, the insatiable monopolist, John D. Rockefeller. Fresh from his triumph of organizing his gigantic oil monopoly, a victory as well-blooded as any ancient Roman triumph, Rockefeller, the creature of the House of Rothschild and its Wall Street emissary, Jacob Schiff, realized that a medical monopoly might bring him even greater profits than his oil trust. In 1892, Rockefeller appointed Frederick T. Gates as his agent, conferring upon him the title of “head of all his philanthropic endeavors.” As it turned out, each of Rockefeller’s well-publicized “philanthropies” was specifically designed to increase not only his wealth and power, but also the wealth and power of the hidden figures whom he so ably represented.
The book referred to in the video is available for free here.
Frederick T. Gates’ first present to Rockefeller was a plan to dominate the entire medical education system in the United States. The initial step was taken by the organization of the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research. In 1907, the AMA “requested” the Carnegie Foundation to conduct a survey of all the medical schools of the nation. Even at this early date, the Rockefeller interests had already achieved substantial working control of the Carnegie Foundations which has been maintained ever since. It is well known in the foundation world that the Carnegie Foundations (there are several), are merely feeble adjuncts of the Rockefeller Foundation. The Carnegie Foundation named one Abraham Flexner to head up its study of medical schools. Coincidentally, his brother Simon was the head of the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research. The Flexner Report was completed in 1910, after many months of travel and study. It was heavily influenced by the German-trained allopathic representation in the American medical profession. It was later revealed that the primary influence on Flexner had been his trip to Baltimore. He had been a graduate of Johns Hopkins University. This school had been established by Daniel Coit Gilman (1831-1908). Gilman had been one of the three original incorporators of the Russell Trust at Yale University (now known as the Brotherhood of Death). Its Yale headquarters had a letter in German authorizing Gilman to set up this branch of the Illuminati in the United States. Gilman incorporated the Peabody Fund and the John Slater Fund, which later became the Rockefeller Foundation. Gilman also became an original incorporator of Rockefeller’s General Education Board, which was to take over the United States system of medical education; the Carnegie Foundation and the Russell Sage Foundation. At Johns Hopkins University, Gilman also taught Richard Ely, who became the evil genius of Woodrow Wilson’s education. Gilman’s final achievement in the last year of his life was to advise Herbert Hoover on the advisability of setting up a think tank. Hoover later followed Gilman’s plan in setting up the Hoover Institution after the First World War. This institution furnished the movers and shapers of the “Reagan Revolution” in Washington. Not surprisingly, the American people found themselves saddled with even more debt and an even more oppressive federal bureaucracy, all the result of Daniel Coit Gilman’s Illuminati prospectus.
Flexner spent much of his time at Johns Hopkins University finalizing his report. The medical school, which had only been established in 1893, was considered to be very up-to-date. It was also the headquarters of the German allopathic school of medicine in the United States. Flexner, born in Louisville, Ky., had studied at the University of Berlin. The president of the Zionist Organization of America, Louis Brandies, also from Louisville, was an old friend of the Flexner family. After Woodrow Wilson appointed Brandeis to the Supreme Court, Brandeis appointed himself a delegate to Paris to attend the Versailles Peace Conference in 1918. His purpose was to advance the goals of the Zionist movement at this conference. Bernard Flexner, who was then an attorney in New York, was asked to accompany Brandeis as the official legal counsel to the Zionist delegation in Paris. Bernard Flexner later became a founding member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation with his brother Simon.
Simon Flexner had been appointed the first director of the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research at its organization in 1903. Abraham Flexner joined the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 1908, serving there until his retirement in 1928. He also served for years as a member of Rockefeller’s General Education Board. He was awarded a Rhodes Memorial lectureship at Oxford University. His definitive work was published in 1913, “Prostitution in Europe.”
Abraham Flexner submitted a final report to Rockefeller which apparently was satisfactory in every way. Its first point was an emphatic agreement with the AMA’s lament that there were too many doctors. The Flexner solution was a simple one; to make medical education so elitist and expensive, and so drawn out, that most students would be prohibited from even considering a medical career. The Flexner program set up requirements for four years of undergraduate college, and a further four years of medical school. His report also set up complex requirements for the medical schools; they must have expensive laboratories and other equipment. As the requirements of the Flexner Report became effective, the number of medical schools was rapidly reduced. By the end of World War I, the number of medical schools had been reduced from 650 to a mere 50 in number. The number of annual graduates had been reduced from 7500 to 2500. The enactment of the Flexner restrictions virtually guaranteed that the Medical Monopoly in the United States would result in a small group of elitist students from well to do families, and that this small group would be subject to intense controls.
What has the Flexner Report cost the average American citizen? Some recent statistics throw light on the situation. The New York Times reported that in 1985, the cost of health care per person in the United States was $1800 per year; in England, $800 per year; in Japan, $600 per year. Yet both England and Japan rank higher on the scale of quality of medical care than the United States. Compared to Japan, for instance, which has a higher living standard than the United States, but which furnished its citizens with quality medical care for $600 per person each year, comparative medical care in the United States cannot be valued higher than $500 per year per person. What is the $1300 per person difference? It is the $300 billion per year looting of the American public by the Medical Monopoly, in overcharges, criminal syndicalist activities, and the operations of the Drug Trust.
Excerpt from Murder By Injection
For more on the Medical Industrial Complex please review the following videos – links for the full videos can be found below each.
CrystalWind.ca is free to access and use.
ॐ Namasté - Blessings!
"Life is an echo, what you send out comes back."
© 2008-2021 crystalwind.ca. All rights reserved.
Crystal Of The Day!
Who is Online Now
We have 1811 guests and no members online