The Church of Medical Science Part 2.


There could be real science, if there were anything to be scientific about.
They are inimical to all data discordant with their non-system that does not include them.
Science is supposed to be inclusive, but they have turned it into an exclusive club; not to add knowledge, but to systematise.
Over and over again, we see the universal delusion. Hope and despair that there can be real criteria or distinct characteristics of anything.

They suffer from a disease even homoeopathy is almost powerless against – deliberate ignorance.

Theoretical science is still a reaction against theological dogma. For it is rooted in nineteenth century thought – exclusionist. Where first God had to be excluded, now it is inimical data.
Instead, they have made it the king of moneytheistic religions – it makes more money than the Vatican.

If I or you were to pull out a piece of chewing gum about a meter long; that will be quite as scientific a performance as is the stretching of your imagination on accepting modern medicine – or its claims on the origin of Aids for instance – as scientific.
Theirs is the attempt to assimilate all ‘verified’ phenomena under the materialist explanation. They want to formulate the rules for a final, all-inclusive system on the basis of what they can hold between their fingers and can see with the eye. Then they have something to fight and to spend money on.
What it turns out to be, is a bookkeeping exercise.
While bookkeeping may represent the results of their buying time and selling your health down the drain, it is not a description of doing business. However, we already know the map is not the territory. While in business this is good practise, in science it has no place.
If they could, they would have a real science. Instead, the Church of Medical Science is pretty moneytheistic, if anything else.

Alas, they disregard the mind and emotions and especially iatrogenesis as causes of disease and so they are stuck with the unscientific, because they exclude instead of include. They seem to think that such is real. I say they build a delusion upon a delusion and the second is as unreal as the first.
It is the reality, which we see every day in practice. Everything is either between the ears and reflects on the body. It can also be the result of pharmaceutical or recreational drugs, manifested in the side effects. Nonetheless, the decision to take them is between the ears. You would not deny that grief could cause a headache, for grief is nothing but a headache – ask anyone who has grief.

You cannot deny that worry could give you stomach ulcers – ask anyone who has an ulcer about his mental state. He will tell you about his worries and nothing else. You cannot deny that blood pressure pills give you vertigo. Ask anyone who has taken them for a long time. You cannot tell me that if you take a lot of xtc, you will not end up with a depression. You cannot tell me that long-term use of any substance, medicinal or not, does not produce its effects. Ask anyone who has taken them. They use the familiar attempt to explain the general by means of the local.


An elephant can be identified as a sunflower – both have long stems.
A camel is indistinguishable from a peanut – if only the humps are considered.
One schooled in logic would not be satisfied with the camel and peanut identification.
You want accessory agreement – that both can live for a long time without water, for instance.

Therefore, before inquiring into the origin of a certain thing it is essential to understand its fundamental nature. Otherwise, searching for its origin is totally ludicrous. So you must first consider all possibilities, before you accept or reject any of them as the ultimate cause.

‘The certainties of science are a delusion. Scientific doctrine is controlled by the diffused metaphysical concepts of our epoch. Whenever some new mode of observational experience is obtained, the doctrines crumble in a fog of inaccuracies.’
(Whitehead. Science and the modern world)

This is a quote from Whitehead, from as long ago as 1933. From this sort of attestation of failure, we can see that the scientists follow Peter’s principle, where all the members in the hierarchy rise to their own level of incompetence.
In the end, we are reduced to using common sense.
The problem is, that it is not so common and shockingly absent in far too many of the learned brethren on the orthodox medical side who, seeking to become erudite, succeed only in pouring emptiness into the void.
Their uncompromising orthodox stand represents good as attempts, but these attempts stand for evil in their insufficiency.


Over and over they have seen our extraordinary cures. They have had no discussion; not even a comment afterwards – only burial and damnation. They like to bury me right next to the victims of Aids and the evidence it is iatrogenic – after they damned me for their deaths.

Burial and damnation or the obscurity of the conspicuous and hence, it is suspicious.

I am consistent with their written records, as I consider them much more reliable than the biased opinions of the doctors and internists, which are at enormous variance with each other and who dismiss even these records out of hand.
Truth is self-evident and the honest inquirer will be attracted to truth more than to opinion.
My opinion in this matter is entirely subservient to the establishment of a truthful record, a necessity, if we are to understand what disease is in the first place; how it came about and on what criteria we need to treat it.


I still believe doctors follow the ideal of helping the people. I like to think they all keep the benefit of mankind as the main focus of their actions. I do not want to believe antibiotics are deliberately used for wanted genocide, as the conspiracy buffs believe. Yet, at the same time, massive dumping of antibiotics in Africa does take place, either forbidden here due to their side effects or those having to be tested on humans for the first time. This results in genocidal effects and draws the attention to the suspicion it might be deliberate.

Deliberate it is, but for a different reason. Those antibiotics were not made for nothing and they want at least their invested money back. Hence they seek to find a place where this can be done without too many repercussions. Several countries in Europe have laws in place that forbid such dumping and in the third world these laws may also exist, but the goverments are often corrupt. Africa is almost the very logical place to implement their dumping plans. They also find convenient the ease with which the rules can be flouted. There may be laws in place, but the body to enforce these laws is conveniently lacking. Because the rest of the Third World does not yet get as many antibiotics as Africa, the suspicion is not entirely without grounds either.
After all, the African continent is full of all the resources the West would want to maintain its artificial living standards. Removal of the population by artificial disease is easier to hide than plain military genocide. It is also made easily acceptable if they are made the victims of some deadly germ. We can then turn on the ‘compassion-tap’ and patronise them about their supposed lack of morals and social responsibility. Meanwhile, the attention has been skilfully deflected from the real issues and the real cause, which goes on unabated.

We must however not forget that 1; the rest of the Third World is rapidly catching up and that 2; diagnostics in Africa are not of the same standard and quality as here, it is claimed. Therefore, we see many cases of tuberculosis or cholera, dysentery and even malaria, being diagnosed as Aids. Hence, although the African population is sicker than we should wish for, not every case reported as such is a case of Aids.
What is diagnosed as Aids – two viral or bacterial diseases in two years, coupled with a high viral count and low blood values – is a common occurrence, not only in Africa, where viral and bacterial diseases rule the roost and malaria medication causes side effects some of which mimick those of Aids. Misdiagnosis is as much part of the Aids hype in Africa as is the inavailability of ARV’s or anti-retroviral medicines.

This can also be deliberate, to attract more aid-money to the country. After all, when you can report 25% of the population to have Aids, you will be top dog in receiving help from the West. Several diseases are as much the killers they have always been and Africa has not yet developed such a standard of living in cleanliness, eating good food and having work that prevents diseases. Where such standars exists – among the traditional tribal people – Aids never catches on.

Nonetheless, cynical people are found in all strata of the population – the pharmaceutical industry is no exception. I can easily conceive of a cynic, who will consider it a convenient clean up. A reduction in the over-population of the planet – as claimed by some, but denied by others – is only convenient. Pity they happen to be Africans, who bear the brunt of this population reduction.


While such a scenario is happening before our very eyes, the conspiracy buffs follow the disinformation of biological warfare gone wrong, either deliberate or by accident. They have fallen hook, line and sinker for the deliberate disinformation promoted by the government and magazines like Scientific American and its antithesis Nexus Magazine. The first magazine published a bio-warfare scare article in the 1996, looking back on the first Gulf War. The latter regularly features articles on supposed deliberate infection with some artificial disease. Since we know that vira and such critters are not the cause of disease, their theory can be relegated to the realm of delusional dreams.
We can also point out that if the magazine would really disclose the truth, it would very quickly be closed down and the editors jailed. Contrarily, the magazine is still published and so we can conclude that whatever they publish, it cannot be the truth, since that would attract immediate sanctions. The fact that sanctions do not follow, shows they do not write things the government does not want us to know or is very worried about.

And in the few cases that something is true, not reacting to it saves the government’s face.
It also deflects the attention from the truth, while immediate reaction will attract the attention that something must be true. After all, Nexus is a conspiracy magazine and there are many conspiracy theories. We have already seen that one can invent an entire conspiracy to cover any story that appears in the papers. As long as most conspiracies are simply speculations, the government is not too worried by a partly correct conspiracy.
It is rather in the government’s interests that such magazines exist. Those conspiracy theories deflect the attention from the real thing, which then can go on undetected. Similarly, the different theories about the origins of Aids deflect the attention from the real thing and so it can continue without drawing undue attention. I can guarantee that the exposition delivered in these pages will attract nothing but denial and possible danger to my personal status, since I am dangerous to the complacency of the pharmaceutical industry. Exposing their scams is not without its own risks, as we shall see in the next chapter.


I gave you the statistics before – 188 kilos per person per year, makes for an average of a ton of antibiotics per person, in the next six to ten years. Imagine, swallowing over a ton of medicine in the next ten years and not necessarily because you are sick. That is generally ten to twelve times your body weight! Add the triple doses during treatment over triple periods – 'just to make sure’ – and you come to way over two tons. What is made sure of is that you get ‘side effects’. Anyone who denies this is not worth his scientific salt.

They have however never informed the patients about these reports. If they had, do you think they would have taken the medicine? I doubt it, for they may be fools in regards to medicines, but they came to the doctor because they did not want to be fools with the health of their bodies. That is neglect on the doctor’s part, no matter how you turn it. Failure to inform is also neglect, would you not agree?
If one in 25.000 dies of a disease they panic and call it an epidemic. Witness, when they discover three cases of meningitis. They immediately want to vaccinate every child. When drugs cause as many victims or in the case of Aids even more, they remain silent – like the grave. Antibiotics cause death in epidemic proportions and they do not contact the Health Department. For this means that one in every 25 will get sick of these drugs. Why do they or we for that matter, not stop using such bad stuff?

When we then also know that these are short- and long-term effects – Aids-patients being the barely living examples – we can see that the entire idea as presented here, is nothing but a logical outcome of their own records. Yet they don’t pay any attention to them.

The Garuda Purana says: ‘Reading, to a man devoid of wisdom, is like a mirror to the blind’.

Instead, they imagine they are confronted with a natural disease and call it Aids, for which they were desperate to find a material cause. HIV seemed the perfect solution at the time, but they have never isolated it. Still, they use this faulty idea to demand grants for fruitless research and think we will swallow everything they tell and give us, ad infinitum. All those doctors in the world may be against my notions, but their so-called superiority is only in their more expensive ways of deceiving themselves. You see, the problem is, they book no results and finally, the people are demanding an explanation.

Now we must ask the obvious question.
Why have they never studied the possibility of its iatrogenic origin, since they have access to their patient's medical records?
Is it ignorance or plain stupidity?
Is it desperation or the cynic’s drive for ever-more profits?
Is it unwillingness or fear to face the facts?

In my vision, it is a combination of all of these reasons, of which deliberate ignorance and stupidity are the most prominent. As an aside, we see here also the refutation of Darwinism. We see stupidity and ignorance survive – not the most knowledgeable or meritorious; in other words, the fittest.

A poor fund of knowledge, coupled with arrogance and hypothesis, seem to be the qualifications on which universities hand out titles, witness, among others, the astronomical, archaeological and anthropological departments. If any of them have a spare one lying around, I am sure they can send it to me, as they will declare the findings set out in this book to be nothing but another hypothesis, based on my arrogance and my poor fund of knowledge, exactly the qualifications I need to call myself Professor.


If they do not know, why are they pretending they do? They admit that they don’t know. Therefore, they must draw the only conclusion. They must quit their job, since they are not qualified. Their doctor’s paper is nothing but a certificate of incompetence, for they declare so many diseases to be incurable. What that really says, is that they don’t know how to cure them.
Therefore, the only conclusion we can draw is that Aids is an iatrogenic disease, which will never respond to vaccination or any other treatment that seeks to restore blood and liver levels to normal.

All science is in need of sound scientific principles, to follow fixed laws and operate with sound reasoning and logic. So far, we have seen no foundation of law and principle and thus no discernible reason and logic-following super-structure. I see quicksand foundations, without law or principle and loose-straw superstructures, without rhyme or reason. That is the impression modern medicine leaves behind.

Germs and the promise of killing them with antibiotics. The germ-theory cracks like an earthquake into disappointments, into which fall expectations. They are contractions of metaphysicists, in their local search for completeness. Except for minor errors – plus or minus the elusive and mythological Mr. Average – they claim to have found completeness. Yet I can accept the super-completeness of God, but not their phenomenal completeness.

The real purposes of any experiment are observation for induction or the verification of these.
With incomparable entities, qualities and quantities, such is not possible.
These experiments therefore cannot serve this purpose.
While they generate a lot of money, they do not bring any significant addition to our knowledge about the disease or the treatment thereof.
As long as they generate money they will be conducted, while the experiments we need are never engaged in, because their cost is too high.
That cost is not monetary, but it is nonetheless the real cost – bankruptcy of the orthodox non-system.
It is time to put General Gordon before the court-martial instead, to defend his self-defeating actions. Then they can throw out those principles of war from treatment too – all in one go.

No comments: