DISEASE - CURE (Cure Your Self - 4)

Medicine Defies Evolution 

(Excerpts from book “Cure Yourself” author Swami Vijnananand, S.V.)

Prior to expanding our new theory, it is intended to put the modern medicine to one more test.

Provided the process of evolution contains a germ of truth, its corollaries and logic compel us to discard modern medicine. Modern medicine, then, becomes devoid of hope of attaining perfection any time in future. Rather, truth in the theory of evolution steers us towards understanding that every time we insert curing organisms in our body, we suppress the ailment only to invite it more aggressively at a later date. It is as risky as purchasing commodities against a cheque when one has no hope of depositing adequate amount in the bank.

The following facts throw more light in studying the above problem.

(I)                 The rate of bacterial growth: The rate of growth at the level of bacteria is proverbial.

(II)               Antibody and antigen: The definitions of antibody and antigen are provided as under: "An antibody is any substance which makes its appearance in the blood-serum or body fluids of an animal, in response to the stimulus provided by the parental introduction of an antigen into tissues, and reacts specifically with that antigen in some observable way. An antigen is any substance which, when introduced parenteral into the animal tissues, stimulates  production of an antibody, and which, when mixed with that antibody, reacts with it in some observable way".

Dr.  Adler offers a pungent explanation when he says, "This definition implies that (1) no antibody is present before the introduction of an antigen, (2) the antibody appears after parenteral introduction of the antigen, and (3) it reacts with this antigen only".

(III)             Antibody stimulated by specific species:  Each species of parasites gives rise to a specific antibody only.

(IV)            Work of antibody:  In the work "Virus and Man" we come across the following narration, "When a virus particle is coated or blanketed with attached antibody it is no longer capable of infecting new cells. If it does enter a cell it is mopped up like any inert foreign particle. The net effect of an adequate dose of antibody is that the infection involves only those cells which had already been invaded and goes no further".

(V)              Work of Antibiotics: At this stage, let us turn our attention to antibiotics. Since 1943, world has much rejoiced over the power of destruction of harmful bacteria invested in antibiotics. After a period of a decade of self-complacency it is coming to light that even harmless bacteria are not completely destroyed by penicillin. Repeated evidence is available to proclaim that no dosage can kill the bacteria wholesale and that there inevitably are certain survivors. When bacteria in the ailing body are killed, there are a few bacteria, though rendered ineffective at that moment.

This process holds well whether bacteria are classed as harmless or as injurious. Dobzhansky in 'The Genetic Bases of Evolution' observes, "Evolutionary changes of the type described in colon bacteria have been found in recent years in many other bacterial species. The increasing use of antibiotic drugs in medical practice has made such changes a matter of considerable concern in public health. As penicillin, for e.g. is used on a large scale against bacterial infections, the strains of bacteria that are resistant to penicillin survive and multiply, and the probability that they will infect new victims is increased. The mass application of antibiotic drugs may lead in the long run to increased incidence of cases refractory to treatment. Indications exist that this has already happened in some instances. In certain cities penicillin-resistant gonorrhea has become more frequent than it was.

(VI)            So, with few exceptions, resistant must appear:  Obviously evolution of resistant can take place if Nature provides supply of mutants to choose from. However, in practice, Nature rarely runs short of supply. More cardinal factor is a scientist's inability to control the discretion of Nature. Consequently, success of a physician in EACH CASE depends on Nature. The scientist in such circumstances is, and always remains, a tool of Nature;  an extremely damaging tool at that. For leaving the theoretical discussion, in practice, almost invariably we find at least a few surviving mutants. Demerce found frequency of mutation was one per billion. But even this one in a billion is inherent danger to the host, considering the stupendous speed of its multiplication within a few hours.

(VII)       Penicillin must be harmful: When doctors are blamed for use of penicillin, the poor community of doctors, at least looked at from this isolated aspect, is not so much intentionally dangerous. Physicians are conditioned to feel that penicillin is a wonder-drug.

The learned doctor inadvertently overlooks the observation that even if there are few survivors under the influence of antibiotics, through these survivors as a necessity the patient is obliged to invite a danger in future. The temporary relief bears seeds of super stroke.

          Man has caused this danger to himself from within and without in as much as he uses these killers to keep his house clean. To quote Dobzhansky, "DDT was a remarkably effective poison for houseflies when first introduced less than 10 years ago. But already reports have come from places as widely separated as New Hampshire, New York, Florida, Texas, Italy and Sweden that the DDT sprays in certain localities have lost their effectiveness. What has happened, of course, is that strains of houseflies relatively resistant to DDT have become established in these localities. Man has unwittingly become an agent of a selection process which has led to evolutionary changes in housefly populations".

(VIII)        Apparently useful, potentially disastrous: The reader need entertain no misgiving whether or not surviving virus creates disease. Dr. Burnet has himself admitted, that "new virus diseases most frequently arise by emergence of a mutation in some virus that survives in the hosts". Scientists give us one more alarming confession. Assuming penicillin tends to be beneficial to a patient, the price for this short-term relief too is enormously heavy, since the biotic kills the specific bacteria only to set free other variety of awful organisms unrestrainable by penicillin.

(IX)             Practitioners do admit the contingency. Dr. Walker concedes, "Pasteur, the great discoverer of the part played by micro-organisms in human illness, looked forward to the day when all pathogenic bacteria would be destroyed and when mankind would be immune from ineffective diseases forever, but it is extremely unlikely that this day will ever arrive for infective diseases belong to phenomena on a very large scale. They are not, therefore, things of trivial importance in the general economy of life on this planet, as Pasteur believed them to be, but are events of the very greatest importance. Humanity will undoubtedly improve its defense against ineffective illnesses in the future, but it is unlikely that it will ever free itself entirely from the onslaughts of pathogenic organisms".

Studying the laws of evolution, acknowledging their validity, understanding that a drug invites more harm than it eradicates, one who continues its use must either be insane or a knave.

(To be continued)

Vijay R. Joshi

DISEASE - CURE (Cure Your Self - 3)

A Mistaken "Cause" of disease and cure. 

(Excerpts from book “Cure Yourself”, author Swami Vijnananand, S.V.)

When inequality itself is the order of the day, a common dose for all sounds a crazy proposition. In other words, when a doctor pushes a needle in your arm, he is himself not sure whether he is inserting disease or cure in the body.

If the effect of such an injection is provocation, the doctors argue that you are allergic to the solution. On the other hand when by chance the antibiotic turns out to be agreeable to your constitution, the physician claims the credit of cure, assigning the magic liquid to be the "cause" of cure. The claim amounts to first-order fallacy in logic. Firstly the doctor hits blindly at you in administering a dose to you. Secondly in the event of success he is the cause and in the event of failure YOU are the cause.

          The ludicrousness (ridiculousness) is more transparent because in the theory the medical science takes shelter of the law of causation. In practice, the practitioners adhere to the law of probability. In fact, the medical school remains faithful to neither.

Without comment at this juncture, we reproduce their own inferences.

1.   First presumption of the medical world is: A large number of ailments originate from an external agency-say bacteria. (Law of causation affirms that same cause must produce same effect. Relevantly, doctors must mean that same bacteria must evolve same effect.)

2.   The second presumption of the medical practitioner is, in such cases his medicine causes cure. (Again, as per law of causation, all occurrences of such disease must be counteracted by the same medicine irrespective of the personality of the patient.)

Strangely enough, none of the good omens of the physicians hold water when matters come to brass tacks.

One of the eminent bacteriologist Dr. John Drew unreservedly concedes, "There is a growing belief among medical men today that the various human disorders grouped under the title of 'rheumatism' are allergic manifestations of specific individual hyper-sensitiveness to certain bacterial allergens. We are not yet sure which species of germ is responsible, but the weight of evidence that has been accumulated up to the present suggests that it is the streptococcus that is responsible for tonsillitis and puerperal fever.

The reader may find it hard to believe that the same germ can cause tonsillitis in one person, puerperal fever in another, a localized skin abscess in another, an allergic state manifested by rheumatic trouble in another, and a rapidly fatal septicemia in another. He will probably find it still harder to believe that the same germ can cause all these different diseases in the same individual at different times".

          The author, as hypothetical illustration, is pleased to set forth the following four alternatives A, B, C, D, which may come into existence when one-say Mr. John, contracts a streptococcal infection of his throat.

A)  In the given hypothetical case, the dose of streptococcus is large, the virulence of the germ is high, and John's resistance is low at the time of his infection.

1.    He develops a severe tonsillitis, in which the invasive power of the streptococcus predominates over its power to form its diffusible product.

(a) He may die from a septicemia.

(b) He may suffer from an extension of the infection to his middle ear, lungs, or other organs of the body.

(c) He may recover (I) completely and acquire an immunity against the toxic fraction of the diffusible product, or (ii) be left in a hypersensitive state.

2.    He develops a severe tonsillitis, in which the toxic power of the streptococcus predominates over its invasive power.

(a) He may die from the damage wrought on his heart or his kidneys by the toxin.

(b) He may recover completely and acquire an immunity to the toxin.

(c) He may recover, but be left in a hypersensitive state, although this is unlikely if there was a large production of the diffusible streptococcal product.

  (B)The dose of the streptococcus is low, its virulence is low and John's resistance is low at the time of his infection.

1.   He develops a moderately severe tonsillitis, in which the invasive power of streptococcus predominates over its toxic power.

(a) He may suffer from a chronic tonsils inflammation, or from an invasion of the adjacent cellular tissues (cellulite), or from abscess formation in the lymphatic glands that drain his tonsils region.

(b) He may recover completely with (I) a degree of acquired resistance, or (ii) with a residual hypersensitive state.

2.   He develops a moderately severe tonsillitis, in which the toxic power of the streptococcus predominates over its invasive power.

(a) He may suffer from a chronic, low-grade toxemia that undermines his general and local resistance.

(b) He may recover completely with a partial immunity to the toxic fraction of the diffusible product.

C)  The dose of streptococcus is large, its virulence high, and John's resistance is high at the time of his infection.

1.                         He develops a sharp attack of tonsillitis, in which the invasive power of the streptococcus predominates over its toxic power.

(a) He may suffer from a temporary disturbance of the function of his heart, or his kidneys, which subsides without any permanent disability.

(b) He may recover completely and acquire a solid immunity to the toxic fraction of the diffusible product.

D)   The dose of streptococcus is small, its virulence low, and John's resistance is high at the time of his infection.

Dr. Anthony Fidler, M.D., doyen of medicine of Warsaw University authority interrogates, "Pathogenic bacteria are the cause of diseases. Why, then, do they not produce disease in 'carriers'? They do not do so, answers medical theory, either because their virulence is diminished or because the resistance of the host's tissues is increased. Thus these bacteria are the cause of disease only under certain circumstances".

The medical world is aware of the plight of two groups of patients suffering from severe cold. One section was administered with so-called medicine and the other was given un-medicated pills. The number of patients as well as the percentage of cures in both groups were the same. England's outstanding virologist and head of the world influenza center, Dr. Andrews, remarks, "Untreated cold will last about seven days, while with careful treatment it can be cured in a week".

Inequality of organisms presents the researcher a hard row to hoe (difficult situation to deal with). The hurdle in the way of the medical practitioner is, therefore, the correctness of quantity of drug at the time of its administration. Elaborate precautions have to be taken in the use of antibiotics, to typify the model, Dr. Robertson, PhD. , and Dr. Jean Dufrenoy, D.Sc., suggest, "Factors that influence antibacterial action are of the greatest importance in laboratory studies and in routine procedures as well as in the clinical treatment of infections.

There are a number of factors which are capable of determining, or at least modifying, the antimicrobial action of antibiotics. The same general factors apply to consideration of the activity of any antibiotic, although the relative importance of a given factor may vary from one antibiotic to the next. These factors are set forth in some detail at this point, since most individuals still think first of penicillin when antibiotics are mentioned. It is important that all the following conditions be taken into consideration in selecting an antibiotic for specific clinical application.

Sensitivity of the Pathogen.

Ideally, to decide which antibiotic, if any, to use, the pathogens should be isolated, in pure culture, from the patient, and, if identical as Gram-positive, should be tested in vitro against penicillin: if penicillin is ineffective in clinically obtainable concentrations, other antibiotics should be tried. Of course, many infections characterized by well-defined clinical symptoms can be identified as being due to penicillin sensitive organisms without resorting to preliminary microbiological tests. Inappropriate or unwarranted use of penicillin, or of any other antibiotic, may not only be useless, but may be harmful, as reported in cases of tuberculosis".

Well, we are confronted with five-fold problems:

A.       We are unable to undergo preliminary tests on every occasion for each patient.

B.        If the dose of penicillin is less than required obviously the result is not secured.

C.        On the other hand, when the dose is more than the subject can tolerate, the damage done exceeds expected cure. Observes Dr. Pratt in case of penicillin, “The dictum ‘if a little is good, more will be better is false”.

    D. Assuming that once in a blue moon, one is able to determine a “no less, no more” dose as Shakespeare’s Portia insisted, it is not all. Because apart from a correct measure penicillin is not acceptable to the constitution of all alike.

          E. That the patient might have safely used penicillin on a number of occasions is no guarantee for him to continue its use perpetually. One does not know at what moment the wonder drug may be annoyed at its former ally.

Penicillin has been widely prescribed for all kinds of minor infections and for conditions in which it is ineffective or not more effective than other drugs. Since it can be brought without prescription, self-medication is common”. But the World Health Organization emphasizes that severe reactions occur only in patients sensitized by previous exposure to the drug. It is known that many of the fatalities that have occurred following the legitimate use of penicillin have been attributable to previous unnecessary medication.

          What is true of penicillin is true of remedies acting in common ailments like malaria.

The same newspaper reports in its morning edition dated 12Th October 1959, warning that drugs used against malaria can result in damage to the eyes is published in the current issue of the Lancet. It is contained in an article written by three London doctors, including Dr. A. Sorsby, Research Professor in Ophthalmology, Royal College of Surgeons. They tell of a 50 years old clerk who was suffering from a condition other than malaria but given a drug used against that disease. Treatment had to be withdrawn when he complained that he was almost blind in the dark and had difficulty in reading. Physical changes in the eyes were noted when they were examined. A 60 years old woman given an anti-malaria drug, also administered because it is effective in other conditions, complained of misty vision and inability to see the whole of words when reading. A 66 years old woman in a similar position reported fog before the eyes. Admitting the difficulty of finding suitable drugs which are also harmless, the writers urge: It appears prudent not to prolong such treatment unnecessarily.

          In essence, what is true of penicillin and anti-malarial drug is true of most of effective medicines.

          The caption of this chapter may be felt a little provocative to sensitive practitioners. I assure them that it is intended merely to draw their attention to the most flabbergasting truth that they at present like to ignore.

When I (author, S.V.) based my theory of cure on moral values, I was induced to investigate how doctors themselves meet their own last day of life. Knowledge of major disease-generating agents should keep them away from disease and death for a longer time than normal. But that is not found to be so. Frequently, the findings are quite reverse and alarming.

The statistics collected by myself, support my hypothesis. Comparative mortality rates as per occupations according to statistics in Britain also strengthen my presumption. Mortality rate in case of textile workers, for instance, who work in less healthy conditions and who cannot afford to pay for highly nutritive food, was 105 while in case of medical practitioners it was 106. Furthermore, it is sometimes noticed that members of the Curers’ community face more physical pangs at the end. Has it any relation to their deviation, may be indirectly, from unadulterated truth? It is the time for them to examine whether one of the factors may be what I am suggesting. For sheer self-protection, the medical practitioners need take cognizance of Recipropathy.

(To be continued..)

Vijay R. Joshi

DISEASE - CURE (Cure Your Self - 2)

Inequality of Man 

(Excerpts from book “Cure Yourself”, author Swami Vijnananand, S.V.)

          Medical scientists from the days of Hippocrates advocate controlled experiments. Criticizing the psychoanalysts, Dr. J. Ehrenwald, M.D., says, "If it means the setting up of a series of repeatable experiments whose outcome can be predicted; controlled psychoanalysis so far has fallen short of its objective". The experiments in medical science are unquestionably open to the cannonade of the same kind. The principle of self-contradiction of the learned doctor springs from the pre-supposition that equality is the code word of Nature and experiments are repeatable.

          A careful scrutiny reveals that it is far from facts. Animal experiments hardly give us a green signal to make our observations applicable to the whole human race.

Our imagination is stretched to a hazardous degree in first testing certain chemicals on rabbits and pigs and rats. Later, the hazard assumes unpardonable proportion when the same chemical is administered to men and women. The ingenuity of some wise brains to put all humanity at par is not supported by facts, howsoever adorable the objective is, in the domain of sociology. 

1.   Living in the latter part of twentieth century, concept of time space continuum envelops our mental frame. It is ridiculous to imagine existence of any two objects, exactly congruent. Science does not permit such feasibility nor does Nature lack capacity to reproduce innumerable variety.

George Gamov says, "If we consider the gene as one giant molecule built from a million atoms, the number of possibilities for arranging various atomic groups in different places within the molecule become immensely large". The estimated variety of such distribution is approximately 62,330,000,000,000, according to Gamov and on completion of the calculation he is pleased to add a comment, "Thus we can see the number of different combinations that can be obtained by redistribution of different 'pendants' among various 'suspension-places' in long organic molecules is certainly large enough to account not only for all the varieties of known living forms but also for the most fantastic non-existent forms of animals and plants which can be created by our imagination".

2.   Theodosius Dobzhansky, professor of Columbia University and the famous Russian researcher in genetics, supports this with equally emphatic arithmetic. Concluding a long argument he observes, "The number 21000 is easy to write but is utterly beyond comprehension. Compared with it, the total number of electrons and protons estimated by physicists to exist in the universe is negligibly small! It means that except in the case of identical twins no two persons now living, dead, or to live in the future are at all likely to carry the same complement of genes. Dogs, mice and flies are as individual and unrepeatable as men are. The mechanism of sexual reproduction, of which the recombination of genes is a part, creates ever new genetic constitutions on a prodigious (huge) scale".

3.   Our talk of equal organisms is rested on a shaky similarity and support.

A Russian biologist narrates his experience in "Land of Bloom", a Moscow publication. On page 314, we read, "In Michurin's orchard I saw two mountainous ash trees. An ordinary one, and one grown by Michurin. The one bred by Michurin did not seem to be in any way different from the ordinary one. When, however, you taste the fruit of the ordinary one, it is sour, but the fruit of the Michurin tree is quite eatable. An enormous difference, a practical difference". Chromosomes cannot tell you anything about it, adds Lysenko.

4.   All the surgeons are apprised of the cases, where the persons manifest abnormal mental aptitude for committing suicide and yet on post-mortem table the brains look quite normal, under the microscope.

5.   Dr. Arnold Hutschnekar, M.D., reflects, "Before we are misled into dividing the human race arbitrarily into two categories, however, let us keep in mind that man with his complexities does not lend himself to simple classification. Each of us has his differences, from every other. To press any of us into a preconceived, rigid, scheme, however logical, is an affront to our uniqueness".

6.   Dr. Barnett admits, "Man, like most animal and plant species, reproduces sexually; his genes are consequently, as we have seen, recombined in new groups at each fertilization, and, apart from uniovular twins, each individual is genetically unique. We know that there is no good evidence for innate psychological differences between races. Despite this, there is certainly much genetically variation within each human group. The subject of innate inequality has become peculiarly confused with the political question of equality of opportunity. Despite the magnificent prose and the admirable intentions of the American Declaration of Independence, it is not true that all men are created equal".

7.   Still more practical examples, in more concrete form, can be obtained in the study of cases handled by Dr. Breakstone. He treated Siamese twins to find that even when the two organisms were joined bodily, the infection was not necessarily common. Evidently, when a medical researcher gives a chemical compound to a group of hundred human guinea-pigs, it is not necessarily a corollary that the effect produced on another group of hundred people, will be a carbon copy. For, the results in the first group themselves have a doubtful value, being recorded without properly ascertaining correlated causation.

The most interesting experiments were conducted in Britain, revealing that not only have different examiners given widely different marks to the same paper, but the same examiner has given different marks when presented with the same paper on different occasions. For instance, in English, the difference was that between failure and distinction.

8.   One more outstanding case. Ritchie Colder, Chairman of the British Association of Science Writers, experiment conducted on "healthy persons under the same circumstances" as the experiment was conducted in a jail on 53 convicts who were to face death. They "volunteered" themselves to cancer experiments. It was noted that the reactions were not universal at all.

In Nature, inequality reigns supreme. Banking on the reactions evidenced on a group in a particular manner, it is preposterous to prognosticate or lay down the course adoptable by the rest of the universe. In theory it is contradictory, in practice it is unconvincing.

An Analysis of Experiments in Hospitals, Jails, etc.

          My (Swami Vijnananand) own experiments also lend support to the concept of universal inequality. After obtaining due permission from private hospitals and from Government, I collected considerable information. Additionally, I myself conducted some experiments. These were carried out in jails, mental hospitals, general hospitals and at other places.  The following charts/tables are available in chapter-3 of the book 'Cure Yourself”, written by Swami Vijnananand, (S. V.).

 Emotion Measurement Chart.

 Pain Measurement Chart.

 Death Convict Emotion Chart.

 Peak Emotion: Comparative Table.

 Approximate Table of Electric Potential from Brain.

 Beggar T.B. Analysis.

These findings support the following conclusions:

1.   Every individual is uniquely endowed with emotional combination peculiar to him. Therefore it is not imperative at all to carry on research in this direction, since our premise is not based on mass-scale standardization, channelization or grouping of human race. We may, if we so desire, resort to classification, always remaining in doubt of its certainty.

2.   When the pulse-rate does not show variation despite variation in a particular emotion, it may only mean that the degree of variation is not measurable by any available apparatus.

3.   The strength of emotional set-up of an individual varies in variety and proportion. In fact, the permutation-combinations arising from countless grades in emotion create all the individuality. The varying grades account for inequalities that exist in the universe.

4.   Death Convict Emotion Chart indicates that even after it has been pronounced that death has occurred by any standard available, the process of life goes on for some time. When to us and to the world the person is dead, when the individual is considered unconscious, certain life processes do continue forcing us to accept that "inward" consciousness continues-or that, while outward consciousness has ceased to function, consciousness has been directed inward. In this strict sense, the moment of genuine death should be located a little while after the supposed physical death because, at any rate for some moments after it, there must continue to exist some life beyond human measurements. Indeed, Sir Arthur Keith arrives at an identical conclusion while writing on the nature of death. This constitutes the real explanation of a type of news we sometimes read in newspapers of a man's 'revival' after his certified death. The experiments conducted in Negovky's laboratory prove that under protective inhibition of the vulnerable cortex, cells can survive the adversities of defunct blood circulation for about five minutes if not more. Experiments in Russia of patients regaining life after virtual death only reflect our delusion about real moment of death.

5.   Peak Emotion Comparative Table indicates that pulse variation can reach a point of limit when under a stress of emotion. The same maximum point can be reached by another person entirely under the spell of different emotion.

6.   EEG Table "E" throws light on the findings as to how the pulse-rate differs in case of movements in brain. The table reveals how apparently inactive state may mean motion in the sense, physics should take its cognizance.

For obvious reasons in every case reported, due care is taken not to disclose the identity of persons or patients concerned. The list of reasons is long and every cultured researcher subscribes to their validity: Government rules, decency, the will of the patients concerned, and so on. In the first chart the method of evoking an emotion is not specially mentioned, as that is not much relevant. One can fall back on multifarious methods. All cases herein reported are entirely based on first hand or authentic information. In fact, very often the doctors in charge and in whose presence I conducted the experiments have affixed their signatures. In some cases the medical authorities actually assisted me where complicated apparatus or operation was involved.

I should point out further that these charts and tables form only part of the huge material collected by me over a decade. This material includes the measure charts indicating human behavior, in naval and air services, in administrative posts, in mines; they include members of the business hierarchy, philosophers and a number which fall under various classifications learned and non-learned. It is far from necessary for the present purpose to reproduce each and every variety of information. Our conclusions, suffice it to say, are thoroughly corroborated by the information here presented as a cross-section of our research findings.

(To be continued)

Vijay R. Joshi.

DISEASE - CURE (Cure Your Self - 1)

General conclusions we arrived at:

(Excerpts from book “Cure Yourself” author Swami Vijnananand, S.V.)

Conclusions precisely based on facts, figures, logic and scientific experiments.

Two previous works, “Death of Disease” and “Cure without Medicine”, amply demonstrate how the medical schools violate the fundamental laws of science. This has been discussed in the previous blogs on “Cure – Disease” series. In the spirit of a true scientist, the medical practitioner should ferret out (discover) even if his trodden path happens to be a mistaken one.

In this treatise (Title: “Cure Yourself”), we shall discuss the rest of the problems that confront various medical schools and see if the patient can pragmatically help himself.

          Again, before drafting a full character of freedom from disease ‘the main task of this work’, it seems essential to recapitulate the general conclusions we arrived at in our previous work in this NEW WAY Series, viz., “Death of Disease”,  and  “Cure without Medicine”.

1.   Foundations need to be flawless. Nothing can be considered valuable which lacks the fundamentals.  All medical practitioners know it thoroughly well that their respective pathies offer no answers to fundamental problems in connection with disease, nutrition and protection. Masters of medicine admit this sorry plight of their science; evidence endorses the truth of this allegation.

2.   Where day-to-day practice is concerned, the practitioners subscribing to any pathy whatsoever do treat most of the ailments they come across and proceed to cure ALL diseases. May be they really lack knowledge of disease in its perspective, may be they ignore their ignorance for personal benefit, or  the dominance of ego leads them to act as they do.

3.   Of course, individually, each pathy contains partial truth. The degree of truth content varies from one to another: some have more truth in them, others less.

4.   No disease can possibly be cured unless the mind, too, is properly treated. The current media of treatment, psychotherapy not excluded, indulge in the common but serious error of "standardizing" their way of analysis and/or of treatment. Essentially, we must successfully isolate the H.C.F. (Highest Common Factor) of cause and cure of disease.

5.   The joint consideration of body and mind alone leads to correct diagnosis. But, lest we forget, the mind controls the body. Even eminent doctors subscribe to the view that 90% of diseases originate in the mind.

6.   Howsoever debatable the nature of the mind, for the purpose being discussed in these pages by focusing attention of certain undeniable properties of the mind, "visible expressions of the mind" we arrive at a sufficiently good starting point. Reason indicates the visible expression of the mind to be emotions, primarily six.

7.   Emotions reign supreme, not for a moment can we remain conscious without the presence of emotions.

8.   This necessarily leads to the conclusion that the H.C.F. (Highest Common Factor) of human agony is emotions. Consequently all diseases are strictly individual, diseases cannot be eradicated by treating them ad hoc, but only at an individual level by equalizing (balancing) emotions. The practicable modus operandi for equalization of human emotions is shown by the science of Recipropathy.  This approach is equally applicable to any one of the six primary emotions: envy, greed, ego, anger, sex, affection, as also for the secondary ones like fear, anxiety etc.

9.   An analytical approach to the claim put forth by modern medical schools, viz. that disease is on the decline, discloses the stark truth, the invalidity of the claim. Disease, far from decreasing, is in reality on the scent.

Discussing the role of emotions in disease and whether we could establish a link between our hypothesis and science, we went on with our quest in 'Cure Without Medicine'. We found emotions do act on the body, or in other words give pain of diverse kinds to the body. On its part, the body concerned exhibits an accumulated reaction on emotions, which initiated the first action. This reaction we term disease, almost invariably accompanied by pain.

10.         We then took liberty with mathematics and worked out a proposition that where PV equals pulse variation and other corresponding actions in their totality that take place in body, E is the emotion in question and D stands for disease. Now we all know that PV is always present only in the conditions of emotion and disease.

                      E  =  PV

                      D  =  PV

                      E  =  D

We arrived at the conclusion: state of emotion is state of disease.

11. Emotions are identical with untruth and ultimately with disease. To mitigate the menace of disease, "Truth" can be a tool that can serve as the means as well as the end. The entire exposition is supported by scientific logic, page after page.

At least in medical science we cannot afford to ignore this forewarning. A theoretical assertion in physics or chemistry does not vitally affect a commoner immediately, but in medical science it does. Being faithful to the revelation, scientists in medical field should hesitate to advocate their conclusions, which ultimately misguide the public at large. If no organism in the interstellar space is cast in the same mold, what right has the medical researcher to apply his inferences in case of one individual, to another individual? An inquiry into the details of this dilemma is warranted.  In natural course, the quest will bring the truth to the surface.

(To be continued ..)

Vijay R. Joshi.