This is what they had to say to the question, ‘Is American Medicine Working?’ which could, of course, extrapolate to medicine practiced all over the globe:
‘US healthcare spending reached $1.6 trillion in 2003, representing 14% of the nation’s gross national product. Considering this enormous expenditure, we should have the best medicine in the world. We should be preventing and reversing disease, and doing minimal harm. Careful and objective review, however, shows we are doing the opposite. Because of the extraordinarily narrow, technologically driven context on which modern medicine examines the human condition, we are completely missing the larger picture’
Medicine is not taking into consideration the following critically important aspects of a healthy human organism:
Stress and how it adversely affects the immune system and life processes
Insuffuicient exercise
Excessive caloric intake
Highly processed and denatured foods grown in denatured and chemically damaged soil
Exposure to tens of thousands environmental toxins instead of minimizing these disease-causing factors, rather we cause more illness through medical technology, diagnostic testing, overuse of medical and surgical procedures and overuse of pharmaceutical drugs
The huge disservice of this therapeutic strategy is the result of little effort or money being spent on preventing disease
They go on to conclude
‘We are fully aware of what stands in the way of change: powerful pharmaceutical and medical technology companies, along with other powerful groups of enormous vested in the business of medicine. they fund medical research, support medical schools, and hospitals and advertise in medical journals. With deep pockets, they entice scientists and academics to support their efforts. Such funding can sway the balance of opinion from professional caution to uncritical acceptance of new therapies and drugs. You have only to look at the people who make up the hospital, medical, and government health advisory boards to see conflicts of interest. The public is mostly unaware of these interlocking interests
For example, a 2003 study found that nearly half of medical school faculties who serve on an institutional review board(IRB) to advise on clinical trial research also serve as consultants to the pharmaceutical industry. The study authors were concerned that such representation could cause potential conflicts of interest
A news released by Dr. Erik Campbell, the lead author said, ‘Our previous research with faculty has shown us that ties to industry can affect scientific behaviors, leading to such things as trade secrecy and delays in publishing research. It’s possible that similar relationships with companies could affect IRB members; activities and attitudes
Dr. Raphael Obu Nyarkotey is a research professor of prostate cancer and alternative medicine-da Vinci college of holistic medicine, Larnaca city, Cyprus. a MEMBER OF THE PROSTATE CANCER TRANSATLANTIC CONSORTIUM(CapTC) a firm researching into prostate cancer in black men He is the national president of the Alternative Medical Association of Ghana(AMAG)
