Lebanon, CT (PRWEB) July 13, 2009
Retired scientist Robert L. Peck reports in his article, The Great Medical Myth, that U.S. Vital Statistics prove that Medicine has not increased life expectancy, and that the Medical Establishment misleads the public by hiding: iatrogenic induced deaths, Medicine's inability to help 80% of its patients, and the value of positive psychosomatic cures. Medicine has well served society over millennia in easing pain and suffering yet is still unable to cure most major diseases.
"Vital Statistics cannot support Medicine's claim of extending human life according to scientist Robert L. Peck in his latest article, The Great Medical Myth", now posted on ControllingYourHormones.com. These statistics demonstrate that Medicine is the third major cause of death and has not significantly contributed to the cure of major diseases. Peck discusses that Medicine denies the positive cures associated with psychosomatic powers of individuals. These alarming, but proven, statements question the value of any further increases in medical insurance and benefits.
In his article, The Great Medical Myth, Peck reviews life expectancy data published by the National Center for Health Statistics, U.S. Dept. Health and Human Services, U.S. Vital Statistics and AMA Reports. These reports reveal that life expectancy of American citizens had been increasing long before the advent of Modern Medicine . Also this data does not support the lessening of deaths due to major diseases with the introduction of the modern miracle drugs otherwise known as antibiotics. Peck notes that historians attribute the increase in life expectancy after 1850 as primarily due to better sanitation and diet, while the increase in life expectancy after 1970 is attributed to reduced smoking and better life styles.
"Peck discusses how there has been no effort to debunk the belief that before modern advances (namely the introduction of antibiotics) Medicine had little value, as well as the belief that in the past people only had a life expectancy of thirty-eight years." Peck points out that the thirty-eight year life expectancy was applicable only to an infant born in 1900, but an average forty-year old male in 1900 could be expected to live to about seventy.
Modern Medicine is now attacking alternate healing methods with the expression that they are, 'no better than placebos.' This is decidedly true; however, Medicine continues to ignore how placebos are well known to be able to produce the same cures as drugs. The average person assumes placebos are useless based upon Medicine's trickery in its statement 'no better than' which diverts the public away from the actual power of the placebo effect.
Peck cites a 2006 New England Journal of Medicine article claiming that the current price of medical care, an average of $6,000 (now $8,000) per year for every man, woman, and child in the U.S., is well worth the cost since the lives that Medicine saves return even more money back to the economy. The article makes the unsupported and false assumption that Medicine is responsible for saving at least half of the lives reflected in the reported increase in life expectancy from 1950 to 2006. It makes the further unsupported assumption that these lives are able to feed back into the economy even more than the total cost of Medicine during those years. NEJM quotes another article by J. P. Bunker for his statement that Medicine saves half of the lives, but Bunker only states that as a guess along with the admission that there is no data to support how much (if any) Medicine increases life expectancy, which NEJM does not mention. Nevertheless, the NEJM 2006 article, despite its false assumptions, appears to be the only support for the current claim that Medicine saves lives and that more money should be spent on Medicine. Certainly less biased and more accurate sources should be used for policy decisions to avoid a national monetary bankruptcy as well as a bankruptcy of health services.
About Robert L. Peck:
Robert L. Peck spent most of his professional career researching and publishing in the field of energy conversion and storage. He gained Army training and experience as a Pharmacist. After receiving his training in physics at the University of Colorado, Peck received more training at the old Bureau of Standards which he left to form his own research companies in which he obtained many patents on energy conversion and storage as well as on plastic membranes mimicking natural membranes. Later he became interested in ancient writings about the inner energy of the human body. In exchange for teaching free public courses on ancient methods of self-development, he obtained the students' cooperation in experimenting with methods he found by translating ancient Sanskrit. He wrote a number of books for his students and then found a broader interest in his revival of the ancient methods and philosophies concerning maintaining and increasing inner energies.
Peck, Robert L.
The Great Medical Myth
Article Posted on 7/11/2009
For further information please contact:
Robert L. Peck, Author