They’re losing their influence by the day and they can’t stand it. Their colleges and institutions are now known as instruments of fear and they’re panicking due to decreasing enrollments. Their followers are dropping like flies and there is nothing they can do about it. There is no going back to the mass popularity of the conventional model that once was. Far too many people are now informed and aware of why symptomatic treatment has failed humanity. Millions are converting to holistic approaches to health everyday because they’ve simply had enough of the disease care paradigm. Here are 4 disease care practitioners which are a much greater risk than benefit to your long-term health.

#1) General Practitioners (Medicine)

I want to make it perfectly clear that most physicians really do believe they are helping people with medication. However, the reason general practitioners make number one on this list is because they are the primary movers of prescription drugs which are now a leading cause of death. More people are killed by iatrogenic causes (more than a quarter million in the US alone) per year than motor vehicle accidents, illegal drugs, diabetes, Alzheimer’s disease and respiratory disease.

The prestigious Journal of the American Medical Associationpublished a study by Dr. Barbara Starfield, a medical doctor with a Master’s degree in Public Health, in 2000 which revealed the extremely poor performance of the United States health care system when compared to other industrialized countries (Japan, Sweden, Canada, France, Australia, Spain, Finland, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Belgium and Germany).

The most shocking revelation of her report is that iatrogentic damage (defined as a state of ill health or adverse effect resulting from medical treatment) is the third leading cause of death in the U.S., after heart disease and cancer.

You’re nearly 300,000 times more likely to die from a preventable medical injury during a hospital stay. Pharmaceutical drugs are 62,000 times more likely to kill you than food supplements and 7,750 times more likely to kill you than herbal remedies. CT scans are a major cause of the breast cancer they are supposed to detect.

There’s a well known story of a patient who was rather paranoid about contracting lung cancer. He was never a smoker or regularly exposed to second hand smoke, but his father had lung cancer so he thought his genes predetermined his fate. The patient tested himself every year with medical scans he thought would spot the cancer if it were to grow. One day a doctor saw a spot on his lung after a scan and diagnosed it as cancer. The patient underwent all sorts of medical treatment, including radiation. He ended up dying six months later from cancer that actually did form in the lung. Six months later his family reviewed old x-rays from previous scans of his lungs that the patient had completed 15 years earlier. The exact same spot in the same position was always there.

Part of the problem of looking for abnormalities in perfectly well people is that rather a lot of us have them.

So, for example, if you do MRI scans of the brain in people who are healthy, you will find that 1.8 percent have a swelling in an artery, an aneurysm, and 1.6 percent will have a meningioma — a type of brain tumour.

Yet these people have no symptoms and the vast majority will never develop any problems related to what the scan shows.

The total cost of medical mistakes, lost income and production, cost of disability and health care, totals $17 to 29 billion a year. Dr. Mercola lists a brilliant series of top reasons to avoid your doctor. Everything from mammograms to depression and high blood pressure are a greater risk to your health diagnosed by a medical doctor rather than undiagnosed.

Doctors also push toxic vaccines, one of the greatest medical frauds ever. Not only do vaccines have the inability to prevent disease, but they may be causing hundreds of different diseases, especially those given to children.

#2) Oncologists

Cancers are always in the top five leading causes of death worldwide, and oncologists are not helping. They tell us chemotherapy saves lives, boosts long-term survival rates and does not damage healthy cells. All these statements by the cancer industry are false.

Adjuvant chemotherapy is often given to patients who might not really need it at all. Oncologists do not consider the whole spectrum of chemotherapy risks versus benefits and thus compromise quality of life for every patient they treat. A study in the Annals of Oncology is one of few which assessed the different potential long-term adverse events associated with adjuvant chemotherapy in cancer, with a particular focus on long-term cardiac toxicity, secondary leukemia, cognitive function, and neurotoxicity. The authors stated that the adverse events are frequently overshadowed by the well-demonstrated clinical efficacy and/or reassuring short-term safety profiles of the different chemotherapy regimens commonly used today.

Another study in the American Society of Clinical Oncology determined whether long-term survivors of metastatic testicular cancer have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity more than 10 years after chemotherapy. They observed a significantly increased risk for occurrence of cardiac events accompanied by a persisting unfavorable cardiovascular risk profile likely due to chemotherapeutic agents.

Peter Glidden, BS, ND in this video describes the 12-year meta-analysis published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology which observed adults who had developed cancer and treated with chemotherapy. The 12-year study looked at adults who had developed cancer as an adult. 97% of the time, chemotherapy did not work in regressing the metastatic cancers.

Why would any corporation have an interest in successfully treating cancer when it generates well over $100 BILLION DOLLARS annually? Follow the money and you’ll discover quickly why people continue to get cancer. When 50% of the population is developing a disease within their lifetime, something is very wrong. In 2011, cancer was the #1 cause of death in the Western world, and #2 in developing countries.

#3) Dentists

As with most conventional medical practitioners, the largest percentage of practicing dentists and dental hygienists are driven by misinformation and myths that have been exposed before, but that continue to be promulgated by the profession due to a repetition of ignorance and dismissal of holistic dental practices.

Dental mercury was first exposed as a health-compromising product in 1840. The dental profession finally overcame the perception that putting toxic mercury in the mouth might be detrimental to human health. Organized dentistry is now mostly abandoning this toxic protocol for fillings, however they continue to deceive millions on the safety of very dangerous procedures.

The toxicity of root canals was disclosed by Mayo’s Clinic and Dr. Weston Price jointly back in about 1910. Close to a century ago. Price’s textbook on root canals, published in 1922, upset the dental associations at that time, and still does today.

Dr. Price discovered that root canals had within them bacteria capable of producing many diseases. They had no place in the body. Which is more important? The life of the tooth or the life of the patient? This is still the primary argument facing us today.

Then there are implants which continue to be done without biocompatibility testing, and they are often started at extraction sites where cavitations are already developing. Autoimmune diseases seem to be often aggravated or even initiated by implants.

Dentists are not being vigilant when carrying out implant surgery and are failing to inform patients about the risks of nerve damage.

Dental implants can cause a unique set of problems. For one, they create an immune response, such as suppressing the T-cell count. Biological Terrain Analysis (BTA) shows remarkable adverse changes in the rH2 values — a measure of oxidative stress. When these values are high, as we typically see in clients with implants, both cell and biological terrain functions take a hit. Nutrient uptake is inhibited, as is the delivery of hormone and energetic information. The body’s natural energy state is disturbed.

Dentists still to this today also promote topical and ingestion of fluoride to prevent cavities. According to the National Toxicology Program’s rodent carcinogenicity studies with sodium fluoride ( Int J Cancer, 1991 Jul 9;48(5):733-7.), fluoride was found to be an equivocal carcinogen.

“In point of fact, fluoride causes more human cancer death, and causes it faster than any other chemical,” stated Dr. Dean Burk PhD who spent over three decades with the national cancer institute.

Researchers suspect a connection to cancer because half of ingested fluoride is deposited in bones, and fluoride stimulates growth in the end of bones, where osteosarcoma occurs.

Most developed nations do not fluoridate their water. In western Europe, for example, only 3% of the population consumes fluoridated water.

There has been considerable research done on fluoride regarding cancer, birth defects, and risks to the respiratory, gastrointestinal, and urinary systems. Here are 15 facts most people don’t know about fluoride.

Dentistry may eventually go down in history as one of the most toxic practices ever to advocate lethal poisons to human beings.

#4) Optometrists

Optometrists just like much of the medical community are fixated on short-term solutions which don’t address the root cause of problems. Few optometrists will admit and the greatest majority are unaware that glasses and contacts are almost guaranteed to destroy your eyesight over time. Unfortunately, they’re not trained on natural and preventative solutions that improve vision in the long-term because they simply do not understand the way the eye works.

Contrary to popular belief, your vision doesn’t have to decline over time. With regular exercise of the muscles that control your eye movements and visual acuity, you can reduce eyestrain and maintain or even improve your vision without any destructive correctional conventions such as laser surgery, glasses or contact lenses.

Few if any optometrists even understand the role of nutrition of even breast milk in eye development. Breast-fed children are significantly more likely to do well in measures of stereoscopic vision than are those who received formula during in infancy.

That the human eye resents glasses is a fact which no one would attempt to deny. Every oculist knows that patients have to “get used” to them, and that sometimes they never succeed in doing so. Patients with high degrees of myopia and hypermetropia have great difficulty in accustoming themselves to the full correction, and often are never able to do so.

Patients with high degrees of astigmatism suffer some very disagreeable sensations when they first put on glasses, for which reason they are warned by one of the “Conservation of Vision” leaflets published by the Council on Health and Public Instruction of the American Medical Association to “get used to them at home before venturing where a misstep might cause a serious accident.” Usually these difficulties are overcome, but often they are not, and it sometimes happens that those who get on fairly well with their glasses in the daytime never succeeded in getting used to them at night.

All glasses contract the field of vision to a greater or less degree. Even with very weak glasses patients are unable to see distinctly unless they look through the center of the lenses, with the frames at right angles to the line of vision; and not only is their vision lowered if they fail to do this, but annoying nervous symptoms, such as dizziness and headache, are sometimes produced.

That glasses or contact lenses must injure the eye is evident through the principal of refraction. One cannot see through them unless one produces the degree of refractive error which they are designed to correct. But refractive errors, in the eye which is left to itself, are never constant. If one secures good vision by the aid of concave, or convex, or astigmatic lenses, therefore, it means that one is maintaining constantly a degree of refractive error which otherwise would not be maintained constantly. It is only to be expected that this should make the condition worse, and it is a matter of common experience that it does. After people once begin to wear glasses their strength, in most cases, has to be steadily increased in order to maintain the degree of visual acuity secured by the aid of the first pair.

Corrective lenses do not heal eyes, they weaken them and eventually destroy vision slowly over time.

We can never heal the body by addressing symptoms which eventually result in iatrogenesis. That is the single most important factor that all of the above practitioners have in common and it’s something you should keep mind before you place your confidence in any of them.

Sources:
westonaprice.org
cancertruth.net
preventdisease.com
douglassreport.com
mercola.com
chriskresser.com

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.