Laws of Biology VS Conventional Medicine

March 2012, Xtend-Life Expert

Summary

Conventional medicine is designed to treat disease with medication or surgery. For sure, when it comes to emergency interventions, it is one of the best most efficient 'medicines' in the world.

Conventional medicine is designed to treat disease with medication or surgery. For sure, when it comes to emergency interventions, it is one of the best most efficient ‘medicines’ in the world.

But for chronic long term illness, like diabetes, cancer and immune disorders, this approach simply doesn’t work. Here’s why……

Why Conventional Medicine Defies the Laws of Nature

Most Conventional medicine is based on clear-cut, yes-or-no diagnoses that often miss the underlying causes and more subtle manifestations of illness. Doctors are taught that you have a disease or you don’t. There are no gray areas. Similarly, medical diagnostics are designed to identify black and white indicators: You are either ‘positive’ or ‘negative’.

Then, to compound the problem, doctors are rewarded by a health care system which incentivizes them to treat the symptoms rather than address the underlying cause. Imagine, if someone could lower their cholesterol by changing their diet and exercising (which they can). Where’s the money in that? But put them on Lipitor and you’ve made the drug company rep and doctor a little bit richer.

Practicing medicine this way is misguided because it misses two of the most fundamental laws of Nature, Physiology, Biology, and disease: The Continuum and Cellular Environment Laws.

There is a continuum from optimal health, to hidden imbalance, to serious dysfunction to disease. Anywhere along that continuum, we can intervene and reverse the process. The sooner we address it, the better.

Similarly, chronic diseases and disorders do not result from the malfunctioning of just one organ. They do result from fundamental cellular imbalances which have developed over years of poor lifestyle habits. The cellular environment needs to be viewed and treated as an integrated system. Whereas Conventional medicine views and treats the ‘parts’ not the integrated whole.

That’s why when you go to the Doc and get a medication for ‘X’, you may well experience negative side effects to ‘Y’.

As an example let’s look at diabetes…..Most doctors just consider blood sugar, which actually rises very late in the disease process. If your blood sugar is 90 or 110, you don’t have diabetes. If it’s over 126, you do have diabetes.

But these distinctions are completely arbitrary, and they do nothing to help treat impending problems. I remember a friend telling me that her doc had identified her mildly elevated blood sugar. Apparently the doc told her: “Let’s wait and see until your blood sugar is more elevated, and then we’ll treat you with diabetes medication.”

This attitude is harmful given that we know how to prevent full blown diabetes with lifestyle changes before it gets out of hand.

Moreover, this Conventional approach completely ignores more subtle clues from symptoms and signs of disease, which may highlight underlying metabolic imbalances, especially when complemented by further testing.

These imbalances may be remedied by the appropriate treatment. Treatment that is not focused on a disease ‘label’, but instead addresses fundamental cellular weaknesses and imbalances by natural means.

We need to rebalance the integrated system, not treat the symptoms. We need to treat the whole patient not the disease ‘label’.

Let’s go back to the emergency room for a minute…..For that critically ill or damaged person, identifying what caused the damage isn’t likely to make the difference between life and death. The symptom(s) must be treated immediately if they are to survive.

For the chronically sick, hitting the nail with a hammer doesn’t work. ‘Rewiring’ the whole system by addressing cellular (and electrical) malfunctioning does.

We have two different paradigms for two different conditions. It’s time that Conventional medicine takes its financially coloured blinkers off and ‘sees’ the clearly lit distinction.

Leave a Comment

Topics you might be interested in