Warning: session_start(): Cannot send session cookie - headers already sent by (output started at /home/content/22/6607322/html/index.php:9) in /home/content/22/6607322/html/wp-content/plugins/seo-redirection/seo-redirection.php on line 11

Warning: session_start(): Cannot send session cache limiter - headers already sent (output started at /home/content/22/6607322/html/index.php:9) in /home/content/22/6607322/html/wp-content/plugins/seo-redirection/seo-redirection.php on line 11

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/content/22/6607322/html/index.php:9) in /home/content/22/6607322/html/wp-content/plugins/wp-super-cache/wp-cache-phase2.php on line 62


Share This

Seeing through drug testing scams

When I look at pharmaceutical and conventional medical ads (websites, facilities, and so on) one key impression is that of  narrow mechanization and a vast stifling of consciousness! The ads often have fake models with bleached teeth, the doctor’s suits are all perfectly pressed, white and with stereotyped stethoscopes and the similar smiles – all of which is to me quite offensive or jarring. It is part of being in the commerical business of treating rather than actually and really healing.  The problems behind such stilted presentations are enormously deep. This is why I am asking the reader to also think very deeply in reading this article. Just yesterday I met someone with advanced diabetes who takes a dozen or so drugs and is subject to repeated surgeries. He is a mess and his life is a shambles because he is being guided by a medicinal system that is largely bankrupt to its root foundations. The whole house-of-cards approach is for me a unprecedented sham. It treats for profit and does not truly heal systemic ailments. Yes it helps in emergency situation but this deeps the illusion that the overall approach works for chronic systemic ailments. Modern medicine actually has no true conception of first “what is consciousness” (as diabetes is distinctly a consciousness-retreating disease marked by neuropathy or lack of feeling/sensitivity/consciousness). The drug and surgical approaches used all claims to be based on science but they are not. Why do I write about all this. It is because I very deeply care for the fate of other human beings as well as life on earth in general. Thus I try to write to explain a very different view in order to make a difference.

Modern medicine is, at its taproots or depth foundations, based on three foolish beliefs that I know to be ultimately and utterly false. Note that, at first, they may seem like healthy or salient beliefs but I’ll explain why they really are not.

A) THE ROOT WORLDVIEWTHE MATHEMATICALIS THE TRUEST UNIVERSALLY- This is the deepest of all beliefs in our modern culture, learned at least since primary school, and namely that chemistry and physics, and their mathematical foundations, all represent the only true, most objective and scientifically valid laws of nature. Modern allopathic doctors are really what I call Newtonian “meta-physicians.”  The word “meta” comes from a Greek word meaning “after.” But the study of these disciplines actually precedes or comes before any other for modern doctors. This is why, before going to medical school, future doctors must study and excel in chemistry, physics, and perhaps biotech, to prepare them in pre-med school or for their future allopathic career based on this foundation understanding.

B) TESTING WITHIN THAT WORLDVIEW YIELDS OBJECTIVITY- Following closely behind this root metaphysical premise is the companion belief that double-blind testing, under the strictest lab conditions (using all manner of precise measurement tools – micrometers, scales, spectrometry, etc) gives us the most reliable, trustworthy, objective, illusion-free or “scientific” results in constructing the overall mathematical/mechanical orientation applied to our bodies – and to then best treat and guide patients who are ill or seeking to avoid illness.

C) LARGE SCALE TESTING  YIELDS  THE MOST “GOLD STANDARD” OBJECTIVE RESULTS – If we then do very expensive large-scale testing of the same kind, as drug companies are mandated to do by the FDA and with peer-reviews, then we can most rely on those results. We can also rely upon them to literally risk our lives and the lives of patients with that trust! That is a lot to ask, wouldn’t you say? Thus we had better be triply sure that these three premises are absolutely true!

But I will explain why, in biological rather mechanical realms (rather than in designing, building and perfecting the performance of machines), nothing could be further from the truth. What we rely upon is a sham.

Let me address each of the above three beliefs and why they are pervasively and deeply full of holes.

.  First,  the math-bound view of nature excels in bringing out what is most mechanical out of nature. Already this should be a very powerful hint that the view is non-universally true and thus not integrally objective. Objectivity is something that gained via a view true from all points of view, rather than a biased or subjective or partial perspective. Machines actually don’t pre-exist in pristine nature. You will never find a bicycle in an untouched rainforest. They are uniquely man-created inventions. How then can mechanical laws represent all of nature. Something here does not click!

Seen nakedly and past a long-running cultural mythology,  math symbols actually, really and nakedly represent  inner tools (or symbols) that guide us in how to separate all elements of consciousness. I use the word “naked” because they truly represent nothing more than that stripped of any more imagined culturally-created importance. They are not, as Sir Isaac Newton supposed,  “what God gave us on the first day of creation to better understand nature with.” This goes counter to what every school boy and girl is indoctrinated with since primary school – the Newtonian worldview – with icon idols like Newton and Einstein supporting the genius of that vision.

And this may sound a little heady but let us bring this way, way down to earth so we can understand how hugely mistaken the “great” Newton was in developing this kernel vision about nature’s universal laws.  It sinks just a bit in when we observe how those symbols are used to separate elements of consciousness not only quite deeply but in very life-threatening ways. They are used in the creation of atom bombs (tearing things literally apart or separating). All the major formulas behind the atomic bomb relied on the schemata of Cartesian coordinates – Rene Descartes visualization of space broken down into separate points – or space exploded. Math symbols  help us also to design machines (things made most distinctly of separate parts – unlike living organisms).  Machine are not alive and not conscious – because consciousness forms a universal relationship of connection in nature, or the opposite of what math symbols bias-point to. To heal is also to connect, so the symbols in their pointing bias also most deeply point us away from what is the healing process in nature.

What if we take three apples (each seen as separate fruits in our consciousness) and undo their separation? We can accomplish that by simply making applesauce! Then we can no longer count the separate apples as 1,2,3. This is simply because they are no longer distinctly separate objects in our awareness. Stripped of millions of details,  mathematics ultimately guides us towards is not much more complicated than that forms of separation.

Measurement thus delineates beginning and end points or measurement deepens the sense of universal consciousness-separation. Its a great schemata for designing separate chemical pills, known as drugs, used to treat separate symptoms, and tagged with a dollar sign.

In my opinion, past deep mythologizing about the supposed transcendent truth and significance of using mathematics, we very greatly suffer under a cultural delusion, a collective consciousness ill (and since the age of Galileo, Descartes and Newton)  of a purely math-bound vision of our universe. It is actually (and this may be hugely shocking to hear) quite profoundly irrational and  unwise to so culturally connect a vision of nature by employing only the very highest, most universal, and most powerful abstractions or symbols for the separation of all elements of consciousness. It’s actually more than a bit culturally crazy – no matter how widely accepted, rooted, everywhere taught and revered that dominating view may be in our times. As mentioned a test-tube isolation used to create separate pills which further gravitates to dollar-sign tagging offers orientations that come together to support a left-brain dominant or separative consciousness bias. These are, in my experience, categorically non-objective from a whole-brain point of view. This overall results, and predictably, in non-sustainable and catastrophic postures toward the healing of our bodies, toward polluting our cells with chemicals and ultimately harming the whole of our surrounding ecology of life. All of this is not the result of an “objectively advanced” vision of nature – as presumed over the last 400 or more years. This is why I never take in any – zero – pharmaceuticals or drugs into my body.

Take any large random mix of chemicals and throw them into a compost heap – where all breakdowns of plant life create the materials for building up all plant life in a circle of unity – and you then test the overall math-hinged, superficial vision of nature. You then do not test isolated chemicals in element-isolating test tubes. Nor do you observe just their immediate impact (the surface of time) on isolated symptoms – all of which creates a biased milieu and illusionary perspective. All of this is consciousness dis-integrative as well as non-objective in the viewing of a living terrain.  Now what  happens to the compost when instead we measure the impact of synthetic chemicals as a connected whole? All life in the compost heap dies. This is due again to the overall effect of a large, random mix that tests the worldview itself!  The deadly results are not accidental. This will happen consistently and repeatedly, reliably because consciousness is rooted in the principle of connection itself in nature. Mathematics abstracts consciousness separation, the opposite disassembling orientation. This counters healing. Thus the latter, when too deeply and pervasively forced upon nature, has absolutely deadly consequences.  This is why species all around the planet are dying. The compost heap’s profound and universal circle of unity here is also categorically broken.

Overall the root vision of the 17th century has been in the 20th and 21st centuries coming to roost. It is now here to haunt us and to the core. Some of its fruits are pure black as this terrible “picking season” arrives. They are many death-laden and poisonous “fruits” which have been pesticide and herbicide sprayed. They are cancerous and polluting relative to a healing re-connection of our body and of nature’s ecologies. The ultimate reason is that Newton, Galileo and Descartes made naive,  fundamental and very deep vision mistakes.

B) TESTING  WITHIN THAT WORLDVIEW IS LARGELY NON-OBJECTIVE – If the root worldview is non-objective, you can expect, closely following behind, that the very same is true for its companion and supportive methodology.

To explain this, imagine that in the experience of life there is an unrecognized (or right-brain perceived) “ocean of consciousness.” This  is a connected vista, just like an ocean or any body of water is, and relative to each separate drop of water. Now let us correlate this to the following. With our left-brain we make mental images in our mind to which we assign words. This helps us focus upon or tunnel awareness towards something. We use the word “tree,” for example, to isolate  and again separate that element of consciousness. Words of all kind will guide the dissecting  or cutting apart of this underlying ocean. The mathematical view does this to the most polar extreme. It is a penultimate “left-brain dominant symbolism.” It can thus be used to build a completely separative-eschewed view of reality – rather than an objective or whole view. The math-based vision is thus not valid view from whole-brain dominant (real objectifying) perspective. I know this personally because as a teenager I was a math prodigy until a high fever caused my left brain to shutdown – and then I was able to see through the illusion of that vision.

Let us thus say that as we dive into the experience of our bodies and isolate a separate symptom we focus on a headache, toothache or stomach cramp. We could name  a thousand other such personal symptoms. Who initiates this chosen symptomatic focus or “separation of element of consciousness”? The subject/experiencer of the experience.  But a directional focus of a subject creates a “subjective bias.

Who creates and directs this subjective bias for a given experiment?  Who determines the specific effect of a drug on, for example,  blood pressure measured by blood pressure testing equipment rather than the amplitude of alpha waves measured via a biofeedback instruments?  The conductor or funder of the experiment determines this and sets the controlling consciousness bias. After all the given pharmaceutical company wants to make a profit in treating such symptoms as blood pressure or a headache, toothache or stomach cramp. If this experiential bias is then shared by subject and the conductor, does the sharing make the experience objective? Of course not!

Do exact measurements undo this overall subjectivity? No. On the contrary, any measurement in a non-mechanical environment deepens the sense of a biased “separation of elements of consciousness!” What happens then is that whatever is focused upon, and as a given surfacing symptom to place attention upon, is the chosen “main-focus” or “effect” of the experiment. Everything else is labeled a so-called irrelevant “side-effect.” Presumably the “side-effect” is less important and therefore  listed with the tiniest of print on a pill bottle at times, or in an ad. Are the choices of what is a “main effect” and what is a “side-effect” made objective via their isolation in the structure of the experiment (reinforced by peer review)? Hardly. When there is the shared economic gain in the background, the opposite of this reinforcing objectivity is generally veritas. Or the personal subjectivity of experimenter and subject is now transferred to a wider commercial venue. Real objectivity is utterly lost.  This is why modern allopathic medicine gravitates towards isolated symptom-alleviation or treatment-based approaches and, of course, for profit. This generally fails to heal  most whole-body, deep, and systemic ailments – which takes an entirely different orientation that has to be truly not fake objective.

The root problem – to be blunt – is that both what philosophers call the “metaphysics” of our modern root worldview (the root understanding of the nature of nature’s elements) and its “epistemology” (or way of gaining knowledge about those elements) are corrupt. They or not objective, trustworthy, or reliable. They are both as deeply flawed and stilted. Thus one cannot build a reliable system of medical treatment on that foundation. It is impossible.

The results are misguided by false objectivity – and for the healing arts this has overall quite deadly and disastrous consequences.


The very deeply false sense for getting objective knowledge gains further force when backed by the authority of political forces. These might try to outlaw anything which does not conform to this overall deception. Lobbying with campaign contributions biases the consciousness of the politicians. Paid media also tend to come on the bandwagon. Pharmaceutical sales were greatly spurred on by TV and print ads since the 1950’s. Combine all of the foregoing and you see why our modern medical system has to so systemically  and completely in a shambles – why it fail to truly heal cancer, diabetes, heart disease, arthritis, asthma, mental illness, and Alzheimer’s and so on.

The  marriage of commercial and lab deceptions are so pervasive and systemic it allows for little else.

Illusion is the “breakdown of the integrity of consciousness.” Deception is the “intentional breakdown of the integrity of consciousness.” An integrity of consciousness means consciousness is true to itself.  But consciousness, at the core of life (as I have tried to propose) forms “the principle of connection itself in nature.” Thus one absolutely cannot have an integral vision of nature rooted in the highest abstractions of what tears our consciousness apart. The mathematical worldview will expertly build machines. But it also makes an intimate marriage with dollar sign to almost irretrievably corrupt consciousness – and to the absolute hilt.

The healing of our consciousness and the healing of our body are intertwined. Making a deep and healing global mind change, we move from this a left-brain to a right-brain-dominant or from a separative to a connective view of nature. What is connective is again healing. We ultimately are redirected to look at whole impacts ( not the partial or biased or culturally subjective orientations). This gives us a chance to rescue ourselves or to regain objectivity. Only to look at the whole is to become objective and to offer true, reliable healing solutions.

About the Author

- Sign Up For Our Newsletter. Get Free Tips and Advice on Natural Living and More. Sign Up Today @ http://www.healingtalks.com/newsletter

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Free Newsletter

All Rights Reserved