Should Pharma Apologize to Navjyot Singh Siddhu?
Ex cricketer and politician Sri Navjyot Singh
Siddhu has revealed on more than one platform how he has used research on
cancer and nutrition to heal his wife afflicted with Stage 4 cancer that did
not yield to chemo and radiation.
His wife, a gynecologist sitting by his side,
lovingly looks at him and nods in agreement.
But the medical profession is up in arms
against him and accuse him of spreading misinformation. They imply that Siddhu
is lying.
Ms Siddhu is not the only case that has been
helped by natural therapies. Doctors have written books on the subject. Dr Jeff
Radiger's book CURED deals with the confounding fact that untreated cancer
cases live longer and many are able to cure cancer by taking recourse to
unconventional treatment that is considered quackery by oncologists.
Survivors too have written how they have
stepped off the beaten track and recovered. The remedies range from change in
diet and lifestyle to herbs, homeopathy, yoga, pranayam, and the emerging
Panchagavya.
The track record of chemo + radiation is so
dismal that oncologists are known to reject them when they themselves develop
cancers.
Cases are considered cured if they survive 5
years post chemo and radiation ignoring the terrible quality of life they lead.
And what is the survival percentage? It can be as low as 2.1%. What is more
alarming is there is a large percentage that are misdiagnosed and subsequently
poisoned for no reason.
That cancer is caused by toxins (carcinogens)
is well known and acknowledged. But detoxification and nourishment is
considered quackery. It is also very well known that chemo and radiation are
intensely carcinogenic!
That is scientific medicine for you.
Hospitals invest crores in chemo and radiation
units. The procedure generates tremendous revenue needed to recover the costs
and profit. It is not feasible to expect naturopathic treatment from an
oncologist.
But why deride and oppose people when they
demonstrate cures through holistic methods? Why abandon ethics? Why stand
in-between patients and cures?
Maybe because if they did not do that the
pharma behemoth would not be a $ 13.1 trillion industry. The emphasis is on
profits and not cures.
This is not a wild allegation. In an
oncologists conference an oncologist who spoke about a method to cure cancer was
opposed by pharma CEOs who argued that their business would be impacted by such
findings.
Health is a simple common sense matter. The
body knows how to heal itself. The physicians duty is to simply wait and
supervise the healing process. The inputs of health are well researched and
known as "basic determinants of health".
But the above knowledge is not a part of
medical education. Surprising, is it not? Or maybe it is not surprising?
Profits are good. Livelihoods are fine.
Business is practical. But should it come at the expense of health and well
being? Should it lead to suffering and death? Should it be a cause for slipping
into poverty?
It is time for the profession to stop mindlessly
pursuing an agenda that goes against humanity. They should at least recognize
the fact that they themselves are not healthy, and neither are their family
members.
From the public viewpoint the situation is
unacceptable. Maybe it is time to demand an apology. Maybe it is time to call a
spade a spade.
Enough of suffering has been unleashed. We
simply cannot inflict more on a population that struggles to stay alive.
That apology should come.
Post a Comment