From The Hygienic Dictionary 2

Categories: The Nature and Cause of Disease
Sources: How And When To Be Your Own Doctor

Toxemia. [1] "Toxemia is the basic cause of all so-called diseases.

In the process of tissue-building (metabolism), there is

cell-building (anabolism) and cell destruction (catabolism). The

broken-down tissue is toxic. In the healthy body (when nerve energy

is normal), this toxic material is eliminated from the blood as fast

as it is evolved. But when nerve energy is dissipated from any cause

(such as physi al or mental excitement or bad habits) the body

becomes weakened or enervated. When the body is enervated,

elimination is checked. This, in turn, results in a retention of

toxins in the blood--the condition which we speak of as toxemia.

This state produces a crisis which is nothing more than heroic or

extraordinary efforts by the body to eliminate waste or toxin from

the blood. It is this crisis which we term disease. Such

accumulation of toxin when once established, will continue until

nerve energy has been restored to normal by removing the cause.

So-called disease is nature's effort to eliminate toxin from the

blood. All so-called diseases are crises of toxemia." _John H.

Tilden, M.D., Toxemia Explained._ [2] Toxins are divided into two

groups; namely exogenous, those formed in the alimentary canal from

fermentation and decomposition following imperfect or faulty

digestion. If the fermentation is of vegetables or fruit, the toxins

are irritating, stimulating and enervating, but not so dangerous or

destructive to organic life as putrefaction, which is a fermentation

set up in nitrogenous matter--protein-bearing foods, but

particularly animal foods. Endogenous toxins are autogenerated. They

are the waste products of metabolism. _Dr. John. H. Tilden, Impaired

Health: Its Cause and Cure, 1921._



Suppose a fast-growing city is having traffic jams. "We don't like

it!" protest the voters. "Why are these problems happening?" asks

the city council, trying to look like they are doing something about

it.



Experts then proffer answers. "Because there are too many cars,"

says the Get A Horse Society. The auto makers suggest it is because

there are uncoordinated traffic lights and because almost all the

businesses send their employees home at the same time. Easy to fix!

And no reason whatsoever to limit the number of cars. The asphalt

industry suggests it is because the size and amount of roads is

inadequate.



What do we do then? Tax cars severely until few can afford them?

Legislate opening and closing hours of businesses to stagger to'ing

and fro'ing? Hire a smarter municipal highway engineer to

synchronize the traffic lights? Build larger and more efficient

streets? Demand that auto companies make cars smaller so more can

fit the existing roads? Tax gasoline prohibitively, pass out and

give away free bicycles in virtually unlimited quantities while

simultaneously building mass rail systems? What? Which?



When we settle on a solution we have simultaneously chosen what we

consider the real, underlying cause of the problem. If our chosen

reason was the real reason. then our solution results in a real

cure. If we picked wrongly, our attempt at solution may result in no

cure, or create a worse situation than we had before.



The American Medical Association style of medicine (a philosophy I

will henceforth call allopathic) has a model that explains the

causes of illness. It suggests that anyone who is sick is a victim.

Either they were attacked by a "bad" organism--virus, bacteria,

yeast, pollen, cancer cell, etc.--or they have a "bad" organ--liver,

kidney, gall bladder, even brain. Or, the victim may also have been

cursed by bad genes. In any case, the cause of the disease is not

the person and the person is neither responsible for creating their

own complaint nor is the victim capable of making it go away. This

institutionalized irresponsibility seems useful for both parties to

the illness, doctor and patient. The patient is not required to do

anything about their complaint except pay (a lot) and obediently

follow the instructions of the doctor, submitting unquestioningly to

their drugs and surgeries. The physician then acquires a role of

being considered vital to the survival of others and thus obtains

great status, prestige, authority, and financial remuneration.



Perhaps because the sick person is seen to have been victimized, and

it is logically impossible to consider a victimizer as anything but

something evil, the physician's cure is often violent,

confrontational. Powerful poisons are used to rejigger body

chemistry or to arrest the multiplication of disease bacteria or to

suppress symptoms; if it is possible to sustain life without them,

"bad," poorly-functioning organs are cut out.



I've had a lot of trouble with the medical profession. Over the

years doctors have made attempts to put me in jail and keep me in

fear. But they never stopped me. When I've had a client die there

has been an almost inevitable coroner's investigation, complete with

detectives and the sheriff. Fortunately, I practice in rural Oregon,

where the local people have a deeply-held belief in individual

liberty and where the authorities know they would have had a very

hard time finding a jury to convict me. Had I chosen to practice

with a high profile and had I located Great Oaks School of Health in

a major market area where the physicians were able to charge top

dollar, I probably would have spent years behind bars as did other

heroes of my profession such as Linda Hazzard and Royal Lee.



So I have acquired an uncomplimentary attitude about medical

doctors, a viewpoint I am going to share with you ungently, despite

the fact that doing so will alienate some of my readers. But I do so

because most Americans are entirely enthralled by doctors, and this

doctor-god worship kills a lot of them.



However, before I get started on the medicos, let me state that one

area exists where I do have fundamental admiration for allopathic

medicine. This is its handling of trauma. I agree that a body can

become the genuine victim of fast moving bullets. It can be

innocently cut, smashed, burned, crushed and broken. Trauma are not

diseases and modern medicine has become quite skilled at putting

traumatized bodies back together. Genetic abnormality may be another

undesirable physical condition that is beyond the purview of natural

medicine. However, the expression of contra-survival genetics can

often be controlled by nutrition. And the expression of poor

genetics often results from poor nutrition, and thus is similar to a

degenerative disease condition, and thus is well within the scope of

natural medicine.



Today's suffering American public is firmly in the AMA's grip.

People have been effectively prevented from learning much about

medical alternatives, have been virtually brainwashed by clever

media management that portrays other medical models as dangerous

and/or ineffective. Legislation influenced by the allopathic

doctors' union, the American Medical Association, severely limits or

prohibits the practice of holistic health. People are repeatedly

directed by those with authority to an allopathic doctor whenever

they have a health problem, question or confusion. Other types of

healers are considered to be at best harmless as long as they

confine themselves to minor complaints; at worst, when naturopaths,

hygienists, or homeopaths seek to treat serious disease conditions

they are called quacks, accused of unlicensed practice of medicine

and if they persist or develop a broad, successful, high-profile and

(this is the very worst) profitable practice, they are frequently

jailed.



Even licensed MDs are crushed by the authorities if they offer

non-standard treatments. So when anyone seeks an alternative health

approach it is usually because their complaint has already failed to

vanish after consulting a whole series of allopathic doctors. This

highly unfortunate kind of sufferer not only has a degenerative

condition to rectify, they may have been further damaged by harsh

medical treatments and additionally, they have a considerable amount

of brainwashing to overcome.



The AMA has succeeded at making their influence over information and

media so pervasive that most people do not even realize that the

doctors' union is the source of their medical outlook. Whenever an

American complains of some malady, a concerned and honestly caring

friend will demand to know have they yet consulted a medical doctor.

Failure to do so on one's own behalf is considered highly

irresponsible. Concerned relatives of seriously ill adults who

decline standard medical therapy may, with a great show of

self-righteousness, have the sick person judged mentally incompetent

so that treatment can be forced upon them. When a parent fails to

seek standard medical treatment for their child, the adult may well

be found guilty of criminal negligence, raising the interesting

issue of who "owns" the child, the parents or the State.



It is perfectly acceptable to die while under conventional medical

care. Happens all the time, in fact. But holistic alternatives are

represented as stupidly risky, especially for serious conditions

such as cancer. People with cancer see no choice but to do

chemotherapy, radiation, and radical surgery because this is the

current allopathic medical approach. On some level people may know

that these remedies are highly dangerous but they have been told by

their attending oncologist that violent therapies are their only

hope of survival, however poor that may be. If a cancer victim

doesn't proceed immediately with such treatment their official

prognosis becomes worse by the hour. Such scare tactics are common

amongst the medical profession, and they leave the recipient so

terrified that they meekly and obediently give up all

self-determinism, sign the liability waiver, and submit, no

questions asked. Many then die after suffering intensely from the

therapy, long before the so-called disease could have actually

caused their demise. I will later offer alternative and frequently

successful (but not guaranteed) approaches to treating cancer that

do not require the earliest-possible detection, surgery or poisons.



If holistic practitioners were to apply painful treatments like

allopaths use, ones with such poor statistical outcomes like

allopaths use, there would most certainly be witch hunts and all

such irresponsible, greedy quacks would be safely imprisoned. I find

it highly ironic that for at least the past twenty five hundred

years the basic principle of good medicine has been that the

treatment must first do no harm. This is such an obvious truism that

even the AMA doctors pledge to do the same thing when they take the

Hippocratic Oath. Yet virtually every action taken by the allopath

is a conscious compromise between the potential harm of the therapy

and its potential benefit.



In absolute contrast, if a person dies while on a natural hygiene

program, they died because their end was inevitable no matter what

therapy was attempted. Almost certainly receiving hygienic therapy

contributed to making their last days far more comfortable and

relatively freer of pain without using opiates. I have personally

taken on clients sent home to die after they had suffered everything

the doctors could do to them, told they had only a few days, weeks,

or months to live. Some of these clients survived as a result of

hygienic programs even at that late date. And some didn't. The

amazing thing was that any of them survived at all, because the best

time to begin a hygienic program is as early in the degenerative

process as possible, not after the body has been drastically

weakened by invasive and toxic treatments. Later on, I'll tell you

about some of these cases.



Something I consider especially ironic is that when the patient of a

medical doctor dies, it is inevitably thought that the blessed

doctor did all that could be done; rarely is any blame laid. If the

physician was especially careless or stupid, their fault can only

result in a civil suit, covered by malpractice insurance. But let a

holistic practitioner treat a sick person and have that person

follow any of their suggestions or take any natural remedies and

have that person die or worsen and it instantly becomes the natural

doctor's fault. Great blame is placed and the practitioner faces

inquests, grand juries, manslaughter charges, jail time and civil

suits that can't be insured against.



Allopathic medicine rarely makes a connection between the real

causes of a degenerative or infectious disease and its cure. The

causes are usually considered mysterious: we don't know why the

pancreas is acting up, etc. The sick are sympathized with as victims

who did nothing to contribute to their condition. The cure is a

highly technical battle against the illness, whose weapons are

defined in Latin and far beyond the understanding of a layperson.



Hygienic medicine presents an opposite view. To the naturopath,

illness is not a perplexing and mysterious occurrence over which you

have no control or understanding. The causes of disease are clear

and simple, the sick person is rarely a victim of circumstance and

the cure is obvious and within the competence of a moderately

intelligent sick person themselves to understand and help

administer. In natural medicine, disease is a part of living that

you are responsible for, and quite capable of handling.



Asserting that the sick are pitiable victims is financially

beneficial to doctors. It makes medical intervention seem a vital

necessity for every ache and pain. It makes the sick become

dependent. I'm not implying that most doctors knowingly are

conniving extortionists. Actually most medical doctors are genuinely

well-intentioned. I've also noticed that most medical doctors are at

heart very timid individuals who consider that possession of a MD

degree and license proves that they are very important, proves them

to be highly intelligent, even makes them fully qualified to

pontificate on many subjects not related to medicine at all.



Doctors obtain an enormous sense of self-importance at medical

school, where they proudly endured the high pressure weeding out of

any free spirit unwilling to grind away into the night for seven or

more years. Anyone incapable of absorbing and regurgitating huge

amounts of rote information; anyone with a disrespectful or

irreverent attitude toward the senior doctor-gods who arrogantly

serve as med school professors, anyone like this was eliminated with

especial rapidity. When the thoroughly submissive, homogenized

survivors are finally licensed, they assume the status of junior

doctor-gods.



But becoming an official medical deity doesn't permit one to create

their own methods. No no, the AMA's professional oversight and

control system makes continued possession of the license to practice

(and the high income that usually comes with it) entirely dependent

on continued conformity to what is defined by the AMA as "correct

practice." Any doctor who innovates beyond strict limits or uses

non-standard treatments is in real danger of losing their livelihood

and status.



Not only are licensed graduates of AMA-sanctioned medical schools

kept on a very tight leash, doctors of other persuasions who use

other methods to heal the sick or help them heal themselves are

persecuted and prosecuted. Extension of the AMA's control through

regulatory law and police power is justified in the name of

preventing quackery and making sure the ignorant and gullible public

receives only scientifically proven effective medical care.



Those on the other side of the fence view the AMA's oppression as an

effective way to make sure the public has no real choices but to use

union doctors, pay their high fees and suffer greatly by

misunderstanding of the true cause of disease and its proper cure.

If there are any actual villains responsible for this suppressive

tragedy some of them are to be found in the inner core of the AMA,

officials who may perhaps fully and consciously comprehend the

suppressive system they promulgate.



Hygienists usually inform the patient quite clearly and directly

that the practitioner has no ability to heal them or cure their

condition and that no doctor of any type actually is able to heal.

Only the body can heal itself, something it is eager and usually

very able to do if only given the chance. One pithy old saying among

hygienists goes, "if the body can't heal itself, nothing can heal

it." The primary job of the hygienic practitioner is to reeducate

the patient by conducting them through their first natural healing

process. If this is done well the sick person learns how to get out

of their own body's way and permit its native healing power to

manifest. Unless later the victim of severe traumatic injury, never

again will that person need obscenely expensive medical procedures.

Hygienists rarely make six figure incomes from regular, repeat

business.



This aspect of hygienic medicine makes it different than almost all

the others, even most other holistic methods. Hygiene is the only

system that does not interpose the assumed healing power of a doctor

between the patient and wellness. When I was younger and less

experienced I thought that the main reason traditional medical

practice did not stress the body's own healing power and represented

the doctor as a necessary intervention was for profit. But after

practicing for over twenty years I now understand that the last

thing most people want to hear is that their own habits, especially

their eating patterns and food choices, are responsible for their

disease and that their cure is to only be accomplished through

dietary reform, which means unremittingly applied self-discipline.



One of the hardest things to ask of a person is to change a habit.

The reason that AMA doctors have most of the patients is they're

giving the patients exactly what they want, which is to be allowed

to continue in their unconscious irresponsibility.