Andreas looked like a walking skeleton. I did also when I followed a similar diet. My teeth started breaking also. Once I started eating two eggs per day, a toothache I had had for several years simply vanished. Many vegans have died in their 50's.
well we Americans are amazed that you lump an entire country into one group of people who you clearly view as being less intelligent than yourself. His death is no mystery....they just wouldn't release a "cause".....whatever you say.
Yes, that advice is a blanket statement. The way we live, what we eat and drink, and don't eat and drink, is a tiny bit more intricate than that... And, "unfortunately", affects even the "hospital only" conditions like cancer. Yes, now I will get "DO YOU HAVE AN FDA APPROVED STUDY SHOWING THAT!!?" Well, if you find a funder for that venture, I could probably arrange for one... And when it comes to cancer, for instance, we have nothing to compare with since we are forced to use the "kill cells in general and hopefully come cancer cells as well" practices.
It's definitely getting better in the health profession(s), in that more professionals seem to actually take diet a bit more serious. But, unfortunately, the health profession is still more about trying to dampen effects of problems rather than approaching the problems per se.
And just what are those dietary recommendations? Prolly nothing you can't find in an article in the Lifestyle section of any daily newspaper. As to "exercise, stop smoking, cut down drink & stimulants, coffee, etc."???
My goodness, you need 7 years of medical school, plus licensing, to come up with that? LOL! I could tell people with chronic illness the same damn thing, and at no charge.
Your statement that doctors only ever treat symptoms just shows that you know nothing about medicine, Denise. They will normally advise on lifestyle issues for chronic diseases such as angina: diet, exercise, stop smoking, cut down drink and stimulants such as coffee, and so on.
For short-term diseases, they may treat the symptoms only because the body's own systems are better at fixing the underlying cause.
If you knew anything about medicine, you'd know that. This is the irresponsible, pernicious twaddle peddled by people such as the late Mr Moritz
His death is no mystery. There are a lot of theories surrounding why he died. Anyone who has ever studied the man knows that he did not fear death but embraced the idea. He chose not to have heart surgery to "fix" an issue he had since childhood (if not birth). Besides, every human being will die some day. Family doctors and other types die every single day. I'm sure no one labels them "quacks" simply because they've met death at an early age. The man never claimed to know how to avoid death. If you watch his videos on the subject, you'll see that he actually embraced the idea of moving on from this life.
He most certainly was trained and well educated. Americans amaze me with their ignorance surrounding education outside the borders of the USA.
Doctors today do not have to learn about nutrition in order to obtain the Dr title. Why that doesn't bother us all just amazes me. Doctors are taught how to treat symptoms. NOT cure disease.
I think that although somewhat complicated, there is room for both types of schools of thought such as in Integrative Medicine. I do find it disturbing that mainstream medicine, for example, could care less when a very sick cancer patient is cured of something as horrid as Stage 4 cancer through alternative methods and traditional MDs (and organizations) don't care to or can't investigate. With reference to this Andreas M . person, every fiber of my being tells me he is a fraud. No research, no medical education and I doubt any training etc. I suppose it's not too terrible to put forth alternative medical ideas he has heard from good sources. But, journalists do this and are suppose to cite their sources. Very odd that his death was such a mystery. I'm very interested in alternative medicine, but appreciate scientific studies or at the very least lots of experience to go along with it to back up what is being said. Andreas M. seemed to have a bit of a racket going on.
I agree up to a point, Nelson: "alternative" treatments that can be shown to work at least as well and as safely as "normal" equivalents usually become part of mainstream medicine. Medicine is what can be proved to aid healing.
There is an unsupported assertion that doctors' only desire is to keep people ill, so they are happy to ignore a demonstratively effective and benign treatment: why cure when you can slash, burn and poison? (Evil laugh).
However, that just demonstrates a total ignorance of where much of modern medicine has come from.
"Alternative medicine" is usually another way of saying "Not medicine at all"
Doctors are brought up on malpractice charges all the time and many are convicted. People die all the time under doctors care. Many medications kill because reactions to them are different each person, no way to know until one take the meds. My mother died from the supposed 1 in a million medicine TPA. My cardiologist praised it a few years ago, I brought it up to him again and now his story is it is not used much and is dangerous.
I am sure your mother (caregiver) doctored you with things she learned too, why is it different for this self educated man?
All his information seems to be re-written words of information I have heard elsewhere. His messages do seem to bring about calm though. The secrecy surrounding his death is a red flag. He seemed like a nice man, but there are indications of fraud.
*So, in areas where people are healthier, we can ascribe it to modern medicine, whereas in areas where people are worse off, it is a matter of lifestyle and diet problems, often *despite* the sound advice of doctors?*
Yes. Does anybody _really_ not know that the prevalent medical advice is:
*Cut down on sugar and salt *Eat a balanced diet with plenty of fruit and vegetables *Exercise
In the past, sugary, salty junk food was not available (you had to cook your own meals), meat was relatively expensive and transport was limited, so walking or cycling was unavoidable. You don't see obese people on mobility scooters in street photos from the 1900s.
"modulo age ranges" - what does this mean? As I understand it, modulo is the remainder when one number is divided by another.
What is the point you are trying to make with regard to people of age 20-30? Can you please clarify?
David, you said, and I quote, " as with treating bacterial infections in other areas, like cancer and diabetes."
That to me reads as if you believe cancer and diabetes are bacterial infections. It is not my fault if you do not make clear posts.
"Too bad that you seem to have a tendency to indulge in ad homina attacks"
It's "ad hominem".
"labeling people as "extremely ill-informed"; adding a "not intended as a personal insult" does not remedy that. I would much rather discuss the topics at hand, and you will never see ad homina attacks from me. Ever."
Calling someone "ill-informed" cannot in any conceivable way be construed as an ad hominem attack. If you think that is an insult, I am sorry for you. I do not engage in personal insults any more than you do.
I stand by the words "ill-informed", as your posts indicate that you believe that medicine has all but stood still since the apparently significant year 1928.
There have been huge advances in most areas since then. This really cannot be disputed sensibly.
I feel that modern medicine has reached a plateau, where the great successes started 1928 up till early 70's; after the 70's, there has been a lot of minor tuning of drugs, such as of chemo-therapeutically applied drugs for cancer cases. Unfortunately, even that fine-tuning has not improved much the last 20 years.
Do I have numbers to substantiate that feeling? There are numbers that indicate that survival rates after 5 years post diagnosis, such as for brain (and nervous system) cancers, where the survival rate climbed from some 23% 30 years ago to 31% 20 years ago, where it is now around 34%; thus a 3% survival rate increase in 20 years. See http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2010/browse_csr.php?sectionSEL=3&pageSEL=sect_03_table.06.html. There are a few sunshine stories, though, such as leukemia, where the survival rate has taken a drastic leap, from 52% ten years ago, up to 59% now. If I saw such progress in all forms of cancer, I would lean back and trust the doctor.
This sense of plateau is why people are wondering what the more expensive drugs really do to us; where did all the chemotherapy research go? To 3% (or 10% relatively speaking) survival increase in 20 years?
This is why some of us are starting to look at alternative treatments and preventions, to complement the (seemingly) stale modern medicine.
NB: I think there is room for immense leaps in modern medicine; for truly qualitative, or transcendental, leaps. But those involve advanced telomere manipulation and gerontology. It is just that the *current* (such as from mid 90's and forward) state of moden medicine could be much improved and cleansed (pun?) from the corruption of doctors (consciously or not) and politics we see today.
I am probably waiting -- and will do my "waiting" in a quite active manner starting in a year or two -- for a post-modern medicine.
So, in areas where people are healthier, we can ascribe it to modern medicine, whereas in areas where people are worse off, it is a matter of lifestyle and diet problems, often *despite* the sound advice of doctors?
Could be, but at least that observation is quite interesting.
Two quick comments: (i) I said "modulo age ranges" so was wondering about certain segments, such as 20-30 years old, rather than looking at the populace as a whole, since we have extended lifespans nowadays, and (ii) where did I say that cancer was caused by bacterial infection? I was merely comparing the progress of dealing with bacterial infection with that of dealing with cancer, and wishing that the latter was as successful as the former.
Too bad that you seem to have a tendency to indulge in ad homina attacks, labeling people as "extremely ill-informed"; adding a "not intended as a personal insult" does not remedy that. I would much rather discuss the topics at hand, and you will never see ad homina attacks from me. Ever.
To address your last post first, I used "metaphysical" in the sense of "of or relating to the transcendent or to a reality beyond what is perceptible to the senses"
As is my usual wont, I will tackle your first post point by point:
*Is not the major contributor to the modern medical success of which you speak -- and where you are indeed right -- a fundamental understanding of bacteria and how to treat most of them?*
It's _a_ major contributor: but so are understanding electrolyte balance, neurotransmitters, cardiology, the circulatory system (lymph and blood), and _countless_ other breakthroughs. Saying the germ theory is the only thing that matters is a gross oversimplification and singularly uninformed.
*Do you think fewer people get cancer -- modulo age ranges, to offset higher life expectancies -- today?*
Cancer has always been with us: and, despite misinformation concerning shark cartilage and other nonsense, in all other animals that live long enough.
Far more people now make it into their 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s now, giving far more time for cancers to develop. Is that not a reasonable argument? However, the survival rates on many types of cancer is greatly improved thanks to medicine. My mother was diagnosed at age 83 with breast cancer - it is being held in check by Tamoxifen. No surgery, no rad, no chemo.
*That fewer get heart- and blood-related diseases?*
These are mainly lifestyle issues: obesity and lack of exercise are major factors. Medicine can still improve the prognosis considerably when these issues do occur, but doctors would advise not just drugs but a change in diet, and exercise. Pretty "holistic" in my opinion.
*Viral infections? Compared to pre-1928.*
Nothing compared to Spanish 'flu. Smallpox eradicated. Polio sorted. Yellow fever not the death-scourge it was. Etc.
*Correction: there is another area where modern medicine is highly efficient, and that is pure mechanical problems, like broken bones and ligaments.*
Wow, talk about damning with faint praise.
*I wish modern medicine would make similar strides as with treating bacterial infections in other areas, like cancer and diabetes.*
Neither cancer nor diabetes is caused by bacterial infection. Cancer is caused either by oncogenes or genomic damage, e.g. by carcinogens. And "Moritz says it isn't" is in no way a rebuttal of this position. Many lifestyle choices, e.g. smoking, drinking, affect this, and a doctor would advise a lifestyle change on top of other treatment.
Diabetes: blood electrolyte issues, e.g. through a sugar-filled junk food diet, or alcoholism. Not the fault of doctors. And diabetes is treated pretty well by insulin, thank you very much. Doctors would advise a lifestyle change on top of other treatment.
Doctors do a hell of a lot to promote healthy lifestyles - it's just that people choose to ignore it.
This is not intended as any kind of personal insult, but I'm afraid you really seem extremely ill-informed as to the state of the medical arts, poorly-placed to condemn it as useless.
That fewer get heart- and blood-related diseases? Viral infections? Compared to pre-1928. *
Is not the major contributor to the modern medical success of which you speak -- and where you are indeed right -- a fundamental understanding of bacteria and how to treat most of them? The problem is that outside of rather simple -- but, yes, *devastating* -- bacterial infections, modern medicine is not that successful, it seems.
Do you think fewer people get cancer -- modulo age ranges, to offset higher life expectancies -- today? That fewer get heart- and blood-related diseases? Viral infections? Compared to pre-1928.
Correction: there is another area where modern medicine is highly efficient, and that is pure mechanical problems, like broken bones and ligaments.
I wish modern medicine would make similar strides as with treating bacterial infections in other areas, like cancer and diabetes. And, in prevention -- or what is called "health"... -- in general.
Archibald - Once again verbal diarrohea. You have joined an online forum that looks at the works of A. Mortiz (may he rest in peace) and people are greatful for alternatives because the medical establishment is deeply flawed and people have been let down. Clearly A Moritz has got something right otherwise there wouldnt be people like you trying to discredit him.
What is so wrong with alternative medical solutions .... 'we sometimes have to look to the past for answers' and yes Moritz might be a little quirky but so are many MDs I've met. With anything 'you take what you need and leave the extreme stuff behind'. I think its called Intelligence, which is something you seem to lack or maybe its more a case of you being 'Academically brilliant with little or no common sense'.
I am originally from New Zealand and of maori descent; they too had their own methods for healing, nutrition and vitamins etc. Are you going to tell me that its BS too. It sounds like you are a middle age caucasian male with no real deep connection to his past. Because if you had some kind of connection at all you would respect other healing methods without judging. Lastly, the world is toxic because the white man/pakeha has ruined it - yes your kind.
You seem to be opining that lack of education is a positive boon to humankind. And as for " Life experiences are more credible than some rubbish you learn at university", you a) don't cite any of these experiences and b) your post does not indicate to me that you have ever been to university - so how would you know one way or the other?
Mr Davies, I think you'll find that China, India and Egypt have pretty much turned their backs on the old "wisdom" and are happy with their shiny new Western-style hospitals. Why do they persist with that if they KNOW that the old ways were better? Or will you glibly cite some ludicrous conspiracy with no justification but "argument from incredulity"?
The fact is that ALL these countries that you laud so highly for their implied joy of ignorance and their supposed continuing belief in outdated quackery are heavily investing in the universities and medical schools you so disparage.
And "sounds pretty logical to me" when you lack the education to assess the logic of the argument is no great recommendation.