Medical Myths: Treating Symptoms vs. Curing Diseases

January 2, 2013 • Pharmacy Operations • Views: 6127

Let not many of you become teachers, knowing that you shall endure a stricter judgment.”

Whether we like it or not, those who work in health care assume the role of teachers.  As such, the above quote (taken from the Bible’s book of James) seems like an apt warning we all should consider.  Although hardly anyone considers a health care professional infallible, we are nevertheless bound to a somewhat stricter standard with respect to the medical information we convey.  Not only our treatments, but also our information, must conform to the call of “first, do no harm.” 

[adsenseyu2]

With that in mind I feel compelled from time to time to offer certain clarifications into the popular lingo with respect to health, diseases and treatments.  As Churchill once quipped, “a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth gets a chance to put its pants on.”  This is, I believe, more true of health care information than almost any other type.  One such popular distortion of the truth typically presents itself in the following manner:

We treat the disease, not merely the symptoms

or

“We address the cause of the problem rather them merely the results of the problem.”

This sort of language sounds very attractive.  But more than that, it sounds like common sense.  Everyone knows that the BEST way to address any illness is obviously to fix the root cause rather than merely mask the problem with medications which do little more than make the problem more bearable.  If your car is making a funny sound, just putting earplugs in is no way to really deal with it.  Traditional medicine, however, is sometimes portrayed is just that way.  The accusation is that while “this” or “that” alternative therapy actually treats the cause, all we are doing in pharmaceutics is playing with and masking the symptoms.

But this reasoning is fundamentally flawed – and sadly seems designed to deceive those who are looking for real help and answers.  Here’s the problem:  for most chronic conditions the “cause” is either still beyond the reaches of our understanding or beyond our present ability to fix.  The “cause” they have proposed to have discovered is often no more than a theory, a guess – the result of trying to over-simplify what is usually a much more complex situation.

Take high blood pressure (hypertension) for example.  What causes it?  Some will quickly say it is caused by too much salt or obesity or stress or hormones out of “balance.”  But of course if these things were the simple cause then correcting them would always be the cure.  But many people who salt their food excessively (whatever that may mean) have perfectly fine if not low blood pressure.  Not every obese person has high blood pressure.  Many do not.  We know many factors that may contibute to hypertension, but for the vast majority of people with this disease the true cause is unknown.  And the medications we use are not intended to correct some sort of unnatural deficiency.  For example, ace-inhibitors (like lisinopril or captopril) work quite well for many people.  But such individuals do not have an “ace-inhibitor” deficiency.  We can explain in fairly extensive detail what the ace-inhibitor does, but this does not explain why the person has high blood pressure to begin with.  And even if we could discover the cause, a correction may be out of our reach.  The same thing can be said of many of our most common chronic conditions like high cholesterol, diabetes or alzheimer’s disease.

Thus, the fact is, in much of modern medicine with respect to chronic illness we are treating the “symptoms.”  Thank goodness we can!  But this is not due to an unwillingness to address the “real” cause, but rather reflects the limitations that medicine and science currently confront.  I sometimes illustrate it this way.  If a town has a crime problem – you begin by locking your doors.  You might hire more police.  You might also install an alarm system, video surveillance or even purchase a gun.  All these things may go a long way from protecting your property from theft.  Do they cure the crime problem?  Have you addressed the “real” cause? Of course not.  But they provide proven methods of protection while we address the more obscure and often difficult social issues related to criminal behavior.  Think of much of our medicines as locks on doors, security systems and police patrols.   

Granted, it sounds much more encouraging to have someone tell you they have the “cure” for your problem while everyone else is merely treating symptoms.  But such encouragement often comes with a hefty price tag.  The cost is typically the exchange of a more complex reality for a simple lie.  As someone once put it well: “For every complex problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple—and wrong.”

And for any who think I’m sold out on pharmaceuticals to treat everything and anything – you are sadly mistaken.  Those who know me know all too well my dislike of taking any medication when a “tincture of time” will do the trick.  And it matters not to me if the source of the medicine is natural or synthetic.  If it works, I’ll use it.  If I don’t need a prescription – all the better. 

To read more on this issue, I recommend an older article written by Dr. Harriet Hall entitled “The One True Cause of All Disease

Tags:

Author: Jason Poquette

6 Responses to Medical Myths: Treating Symptoms vs. Curing Diseases

  1. darwinismisareligion says:

    So, based on your article, we’re being sold ignorance to the public and modern medicine is like ear plugs.

    Sometimes, the solutions to the most complex problems are the simplest.
    If a method works to treat the cause, it shouldn’t be sneered upon by the scientific community just because the method has not been validated, because equally, both sides are ignorant as to the complexity.

  2. tracychess says:

    The cause of any chronic illness is ‘chronic’.

    No chronic illness can be cured by a medicine, it must be cured by finding and addressing the chronic cause. ‘treatments’ simply fail to cure chronic diseases, they fail to address the chronic cause.

    The most trivial diseases, like bacterial infection, malnutrition, and chronic toxicities, can persist
    for very long periods, if the cause is chronic, even if the cause is usually below the normal threshold for the disease.

    An elementary illness is an illness with a single cause, like scurvy. It can be cured by addressing the cause. If the cause is chronic, the illness can only be cure by addressing the chronic nature of the cause, not just the cause.

    A compound illness has more than one cause. It is only cured by addressing each of the causes. A compound chronic illness can only be cured by addressing the chronic nature of each of the causes.

    To your health, Tracy
    Founder: Healthicine

  3. Ronald123 says:

    I’ll give you some information no oncologist will ever give you and the reason breast cancer (for example) is ‘on the rise’ and why surprisingly many breast cancer patients survive their diagnosis IN SPITE of the poisonous chemotherapy they’re almost routinely been put through (chemotherapy is even forced upon minors when school medicine dictates it and the parents cannot do anything about it even if they wanted to, because they will loose their parental rights!).

    Okay, here’s the info:

    1) “Therefore, for every 100 non-palpable cancers found through mammography alone, 54 would presumably have gone away.”

    2) “Of course it is impossible to say which particular cancer will disappear without treatment, and so all must be treated.”

    Can you put 2 and 2 together (or better, 1 and 2…) and see why ‘preventive screening’ is becoming such a hype?

    If ‘modern medicine’ (or ‘big pharma’, because that’s the organization in charge) really wanted to look into ways to distinguish between cancers that go away on their own and the ones that might not (and the reasons for this), why have they always refused to test a post doctoral thesis (handed over to the medical faculty of the university of Tübingen in 1981!) – or let the doctor in question demonstrate his theory to them – that promised to do just that!?

    Instead, they’ve done everything in their power to make sure this thesis/theory will never officially be put to the test: they’ve taken away this doctor’s license, thrown him in jail a few times, refused to test his work (and refused to let him demonstrate it to them), slander his name in the mainstream media (easy to do when you practically own the mainstream media: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-evils-of-big-pharma-exposed/5425382) and drive him into exile. Testing ‘German New Medicine’ (GNM), that’s what it’s all about, would hardly cost any money (as if that would be an obstacle for big pharma), but they’re not gonna shut down their own business, and THAT’S WHAT IT’S ALL ABOUT…

    Dr. Hamer sadly passed away the 2nd of this month (age 83) and I’m sure the medical establishment feels a lot more at ease now, but sooner or later the work of this fearless man will shine through and people will finally take back their health (and their money), throw away their lifelong medication and enjoy the renewed confidence in the amazing self-regulating abilities of the body. Many people already put the knowledge of GNM in practice and one day their number will reach a critical level… I hope this day will come BEFORE mandatory chemical poisoning becomes the rule (look at the mandatory vaccination hype, forced chemo for minors, etc. and you’ll realize something is going terribly wrong here).

  4. Ronald123 says:

    Okay, I’ve edited the links in my earlier comment, because at first I’ve put them between parenthesis which doesn’t seem to work here… Then the old version got published…

    First link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3320224/

    Second link: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-evils-of-big-pharma-exposed/5425382

    I hope they work now. Cheers

  5. Ronald123 says:

    I’ll give you some information no oncologist will ever give you and the reason breast cancer (for example) is ‘on the rise’ and why surprisingly many breast cancer patients survive their diagnosis IN SPITE of the poisonous chemotherapy they’re almost routinely been put through (chemotherapy is even forced upon minors when school medicine dictates it and the parents cannot do anything about it even if they wanted to, because they will loose their parental rights!).

    Okay, here’s the info:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3320224/

    1) “Therefore, for every 100 non-palpable cancers found through mammography alone, 54 would presumably have gone away.”
    2) “Of course it is impossible to say which particular cancer will disappear without treatment, and so all must be treated”

    Can you put 2 and 2 together (or better, 1 and 2) and see why ‘preventive screening’ is becoming such a hype?

    If ‘modern medicine’ (or ‘big pharma’, because that’s the organization in charge) really wanted to look into ways to distinguish between cancers that go away on their own and the ones that might not (and the reasons for this), why have they always refused to test a post doctoral thesis handed over to the medical faculty of the university of Tübingen in 1981 – or let the doctor in question demonstrate his theory to them – that promised to do exactly that!?

    Instead, they’ve done everything in their power to make sure this thesis/theory will never officially be put to the test: they’ve taken away this doctor’s license, thrown him in jail a few times, refused to test his work (and refused to let him demonstrate it to them), slander his name in the mainstream media ( easy to do when you practically own the mainstream media http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-evils-of-big-pharma-exposed/5425382 ) and drive him into exile.

    Testing ‘German New Medicine’ (GNM), would hardly cost any money (as if that would be an obstacle for big pharma), but they’re not gonna shut down their own business, and THAT’S WHAT IT’S ALL ABOUT!

    Dr. Hamer sadly passed away on July the 2nd 2017 (age 82) and I’m sure the medical establishment feels a lot more at ease now, but sooner or later the work of this fearless man will shine through and people will finally take back their health (and their money), throw away their lifelong medication and enjoy the renewed confidence in the amazing self-regulating abilities of the body.

    Many people already put the knowledge of GNM in practice and one day their number will reach a critical level! I hope this day will come BEFORE mandatory chemical poisoning becomes the rule (look at the mandatory vaccination hype, forced chemo for minors, etc. and you’ll realize something is going terribly wrong here).

  6. Ronald123 says:

    Okay, so you keep throwing out my post here. Nothing new, really. Hope you sleep well at night, ‘honest apothecary’ (what a joke)… Oh, wait a minute, now I can see my comments again here… Maybe it’s just some bug in the comment section of this website.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *