An End to Upside Down Medicine
By Mark Gober – 50 Q&As – Unbekoming Book Summary
I’ve recently come across this book and it is an excellent addition to the small but growing library that well explains the fraud that is virology (among plenty of other topics).
Other excellent books in this library that I can strongly recommend are:
With thanks to Mark Gober.
Analogy
Imagine a garden where plants are struggling to thrive. The conventional approach (current medical system) focuses on fighting off pests with increasingly powerful pesticides, while largely ignoring the soil quality, water conditions, and overall environment. When plants get sick, the gardeners blame invisible pests and spray more chemicals, creating a cycle of dependency on these treatments.
However, a master gardener (representing the alternative approach) would first examine the soil's quality, the water's purity, the amount of sunlight, and the overall environmental conditions. They understand that healthy plants in rich soil naturally resist pests and disease. Rather than fighting symptoms, they focus on creating optimal conditions for health.
The garden itself has an innate intelligence (consciousness) that knows how to thrive when given proper conditions. The master gardener works with this intelligence rather than trying to override it with artificial interventions. They recognize that all parts of the garden are interconnected - the soil, water, air, and even the gardener's own energy and intention affect the garden's health.
When other gardeners point to pest damage as proof of their pest-centered theory, the master gardener sees these symptoms as signs of underlying imbalance rather than the root cause. They understand that trying to kill all pests not only fails to address the real issues but often makes things worse by damaging the garden's natural balance.
This mirrors the book's central message: true health comes from understanding and supporting the body's natural healing capabilities rather than fighting symptoms with increasingly toxic interventions. Just as a garden's health reflects its entire environment, human health reflects the totality of our physical, emotional, energetic, and conscious experience.
12-point summary
1. Fundamental Challenge to Germ Theory: The standard model of infectious disease through viral and bacterial transmission is questioned with extensive documentation showing lack of proper virus isolation and failure to demonstrate contagion in controlled studies.
2. Pharmaceutical Industry Control: The medical system is heavily influenced by pharmaceutical companies through funding of education, research, regulation, and politics, creating a self-perpetuating system that prioritizes profit over healing.
3. Vaccine Safety Concerns: The 1986 liability protection led to a dramatic increase in childhood vaccines without proper safety testing or use of true placebos, while historical data suggests disease decline preceded vaccine introduction.
4. Historical Disease Reexamination: Major disease outbreaks like polio, Spanish flu, and HIV/AIDS may have been misattributed to viral causes while overlooking environmental toxins, medical treatments, and other factors as primary causes.
5. Alternative Disease Causation: Four main factors are proposed as primary causes of disease: nutrition, toxic exposures, electromagnetic radiation, and stress, rather than germs.
6. Consciousness and Health: Evidence suggests consciousness directly influences physical health, with documented cases of spontaneous healing, placebo effects, and mind-matter interaction demonstrating this connection.
7. Scientific Methodology Problems: Current virology practices lack proper controls and isolation procedures, calling into question fundamental assumptions about viral diseases and contagion.
8. Medical Freedom Issues: The COVID-19 era demonstrated how health emergencies can be used to implement societal controls, highlighting the connection between medical freedom and personal sovereignty.
9. Energy and Resonance: Research supports the existence of biofields and energy transmission between individuals, suggesting some apparent disease transmission might occur through resonance rather than physical contagion.
10. Past Life Influences: Evidence suggests health conditions may be influenced by past life experiences and pre-birth planning, adding another dimension to disease causation beyond physical factors.
11. Holistic Understanding: Ancient healing traditions and modern research support a more comprehensive view of health that includes physical, emotional, spiritual, and environmental factors.
12. Future Implications: A transformed medical system would emphasize root causes, natural immunity, and individual sovereignty while resisting fear-based responses and pharmaceutical dependence.
Excerpt from the Introduction
Psychological Hurdles
In addition to headwinds posed by the medical establishment, the general public’s psychology serves as a barrier to a new medical paradigm. More specifically, the way people think often anchors them toward the prevailing and engrained belief systems.
Before embarking on a journey to critique the allopathic model, it’s important to appropriately orient one’s mindset. This exercise aims to reduce the cognitive dissonance—emotional discomfort—that might accompany forthcoming discussions in this book.
1. Anomalies Matter
An anomaly is something that doesn’t fit a worldview—it’s an exception to the rule. Encountering even a single anomaly is problematic because it implies the “rule” is incorrect and a new one is needed. For example:
In 1900, Lord Kelvin, a leading authority in science, declared that physics had largely figured everything out, except for two “clouds”—unsolved mysteries.
These two anomalies evolved into relativity theory and quantum mechanics, leading to drastic changes in scientific thinking.
2. Correlation Does Not Imply Causation
If firefighters are observed at the scene of a fire, multiple explanations arise:
One might assume the firefighters caused the fire.
Alternatively, one might imagine the fire manifested them.
The actual explanation, of course, is that firefighters respond to fires. This underscores the need to carefully explore relationships rather than assume causation based on correlation.
This principle is critical when uncovering the causes of illness. For example:
If people fall ill in the same place at the same time, one cannot automatically conclude it’s due to a contagious virus or bacteria.
Other factors, like environmental toxins, radiation, changes in weather, emotional distress, or other shared exposures, must also be considered.
Critical thinking and open-mindedness are essential in exploring causation.
3. Presuppositions Often Go Unacknowledged
A presupposition is an assumption underlying a belief system. When left unexamined, people may believe things solely because “someone said so.”
For example:
During COVID-19, the six-feet social-distancing rule dominated policy worldwide.
Former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb admitted in 2021 that the rule was “arbitrary.”
Blind faith in “expert” statements often leads to logical fallacies, such as the appeal to authority, resulting in cult-like superstitions.
4. Science Is an Approach, Not a Religion
The term “science” has come to mean “whatever mainstream scientists or doctors say.”
In 2021, Anthony Fauci claimed that attacks on him were “attacks on science.”
True science, however, welcomes endless challenges, whereas dogma does not allow questioning. Ironically, the institution of “science” has, in some ways, become its own religion.
5. Consensus Does Not Always Mean “Truth”
There’s a pervasive belief that if the majority of authority figures agree on something, it must be true. However, Michael Crichton highlighted the flaws in this mindset:
“Consensus science is an extremely pernicious development. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it’s a way to avoid debate by claiming the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear that ‘the consensus of scientists agrees,’ reach for your wallet—you’re being had. The work of science has nothing to do with consensus. Science requires only one investigator who is right, with verifiable results. The greatest scientists in history are great because they broke with the consensus.”
Crichton’s point is clear:
If it’s consensus, it isn’t science.
If it’s science, it isn’t consensus.
Period.
50 Questions & Answers
1. What is allopathic medicine, and how does it fundamentally differ from other medical approaches?
Allopathic medicine operates on two core principles: reductionism and a focus on symptoms rather than root causes. It reduces complex health conditions to single, tangible causes that can be treated with pharmaceutical interventions, following a "one disease, one cause, one miracle pill" approach. The model also ignores or ridicules the possibility of spiritual dimensions or the existence of the soul, despite scientific evidence suggesting otherwise.
This approach stands in stark contrast to traditional healing methods that take a more holistic view. Allopathic medicine serves as a "Band-Aid," often solving problems in the short term while leaving underlying issues unaddressed. The system views humans as biological robots destined to have certain ailments because of their genetics, neglecting emerging understanding in fields like epigenetics and the role of environmental factors in health outcomes.
Rockefeller Medicine Men - Lies are Unbekoming
2. How do pharmaceutical companies influence modern medical education and practice according to the book?
Pharmaceutical companies pour millions of dollars into medical schools, shaping doctors' opinions and prescribing habits from their earliest training. They establish relationships with faculty and students early, building connections that influence how future doctors will practice medicine. Dr. Suzanne Humphries notes that medical education effectively turns doctors into "highly trained technicians for the pharmaceutical industry" rather than true healers.
The influence extends beyond education into research and regulation. The pharmaceutical industry steers research toward allopathic solutions, limiting funding for alternative treatments. Nearly half of the FDA's budget comes from pharmaceutical companies, and nine out of ten previous FDA commissioners joined pharmaceutical companies after leaving the FDA. Additionally, more than two-thirds of Congress accepted money from the pharmaceutical industry in 2020, creating a system where legislative control is effectively purchased.
3. What is the "No Virus" position, and what are its core arguments regarding virus isolation?
The "No Virus" position argues that no virus has ever been properly isolated and proven to exist as currently defined. The two primary methodological problems identified are: viruses are not physically isolated in virology experiments, which means viruses cannot be known to exist, and virology studies lack proper controls. This position contends that the field of virology does not follow the scientific method, rendering it pseudoscience.
The argument isn't that people don't get sick, but rather that illness attributed to viruses may have other causes. The position challenges the foundational methods of virology, suggesting that scientists got ahead of themselves and developed beliefs that were accepted as fact without proper validation. This view gained particular attention during COVID-19, with multiple organizations worldwide failing to provide evidence of proper virus isolation through Freedom of Information requests.
Settling the Virus Debate - Lies are Unbekoming
4. How does the cell culture method used in virology differ from true isolation according to critics?
The cell culture method, established by Enders and Peebles in 1954, involves taking fluids from sick patients and mixing them with a "soup" of substances including antibiotics, bovine amniotic fluid, horse serum, beef embryo extract, and various other materials. Critics argue this method doesn't isolate anything but rather creates a mixture of substances that can cause cellular breakdown for reasons unrelated to any virus.
True isolation, according to critics, would require separating the virus completely from all other materials - similar to taking a hammer out of a toolbox and separating it from other tools. Without this physical isolation, there's no way to prove that any observed effects come from a virus rather than from other materials in the mixture or from the experimental conditions themselves. The critics argue that claiming to have isolated a virus from this method is like claiming to have isolated a criminal just because they were seen outside a bank.
5. What problems have been identified with electron microscope imaging of alleged viruses?
The primary issue with electron microscope imaging is that the images are static and taken from samples outside the living body. This creates a fundamental problem because viruses are supposed to be intracellular parasites that enter host cells, but static images can't demonstrate this process. Additionally, the sample preparation process for electron microscopy involves tampering with the specimen through embedding in resin, cutting into thin slices, or freezing, which can alter the material being studied.
Another significant problem is the misidentification of cellular material under electron microscopes. For example, a 2020 paper in Kidney360 warned about misinterpreting viral-like inclusions, and the CDC admitted that researchers have inaccurately reported subcellular structures as coronavirus particles. Without first isolating and purifying a virus, there's no way to know if the particles being photographed are actually viruses or just normal cellular components.
6. What is terrain theory, and how does it explain disease differently from germ theory?
Terrain theory focuses on the condition of the body's internal environment rather than external germs as the primary cause of disease. This perspective suggests that one's "terrain" (body and mind) is central to health, similar to how healthy soil results in healthy plants. Under this theory, bacteria and other microorganisms are seen not as primary causes of disease but as nature's clean-up crew, appearing in response to tissue damage or toxicity.
This approach fundamentally differs from germ theory by viewing microorganisms as helpful rather than harmful. Terrain theorists argue that poor health conditions, environmental toxins, electromagnetic influences, and emotional states create the conditions for disease, while microorganisms appear as part of the healing response. This view suggests that modern medicine has misinterpreted the presence of bacteria and other microbes at sites of disease, confusing healing agents for causative agents.
7. How did the understanding of HIV/AIDS challenge conventional medical thinking?
The HIV/AIDS narrative revealed significant anomalies that challenged conventional medical thinking. Notable scientists, including Nobel laureate Kary Mullis, questioned the connection between HIV and AIDS, pointing out that no one had ever proven HIV causes AIDS. The categorization of AIDS itself was problematic - common diseases would be reclassified as AIDS simply based on the presence of a positive HIV test, even though the tests themselves were shown to be unreliable with many false positives.
The case of HIV/AIDS also highlighted problems with toxic treatments like AZT, which may have caused more harm than the condition itself. Long-term survivors were often those who refused AZT treatment from the beginning. Additionally, there were numerous documented cases of failed transmission, including instances where individuals were directly exposed to HIV-positive blood without becoming infected, challenging the conventional understanding of viral transmission.
HIV - a virus like no other - Lies are Unbekoming
8. What alternative explanations were presented for the polio epidemic beyond viral infection?
A compelling alternative explanation for the polio epidemic links the disease to the use of toxic pesticides, particularly DDT. The correlation between pesticide use and polio cases was documented by researcher Jim West, showing that polio cases tracked closely with pesticide use from 1940 to 1970. DDT was known to cause symptoms similar to polio, including degeneration of the anterior horn cells of the spinal cord in animals.
The decline in polio cases coincided with reduced pesticide use, occurring before the introduction of the Salk vaccine in 1955. This timing suggests that the reduction in toxic environmental exposures, rather than vaccination, may have been responsible for the decrease in polio cases. Additionally, many cases diagnosed as polio may have been instances of pesticide poisoning, as the symptoms were similar and diagnosis was often based on symptoms alone rather than any specific testing.
The Moth in the Iron Lung by Forrest Maready
9. What role did Freedom of Information requests play in questioning virus isolation claims?
Freedom of Information (FOI) requests led by Christine Massey revealed that over 216 different institutions in forty countries could not provide evidence of proper virus isolation. These requests specifically asked for records showing isolation of viruses directly from patient samples without mixing with other genetic material. The responses consistently showed that no institution could provide or cite even one record of such isolation.
The CDC's response was particularly notable, stating that a "search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request." When pressed further, the CDC admitted that the definition of isolation provided in the requests was "outside of what is possible in virology" - effectively acknowledging that virology does not isolate viruses in the true sense of the word. This systematic failure to provide evidence of isolation extended beyond SARS-CoV-2 to include many other alleged viruses.
10. How do Koch's postulates differ from Rivers's postulates, and why is this significant?
Koch's postulates, developed for bacterial diseases, require that the microorganism must be found in the ill but not the healthy, must be isolated and grown in pure culture, must produce the same disease in another host, and must be re-isolated from that new host. Rivers's postulates, developed later for viruses, modified these requirements but maintained similar principles of isolation, cultivation, and disease reproduction.
The significance lies in the fact that, according to critics, neither set of postulates has been fully satisfied for any viral disease. This failure to meet these basic scientific criteria suggests fundamental problems with the viral theory of disease causation. Even though the WHO stated in 2003 that "conclusive identification of a causative agent must meet all criteria of Koch's postulate," this requirement has been consistently ignored or dismissed as outdated when it cannot be met.
11. How does Dr. Stefan Lanka's control study challenge standard virology practices?
Dr. Lanka's 2021 control study examined whether cell breakdown occurs in cell-culture soups without adding fluids from a sick person. He used the same procedures as modern virology but excluded patient samples. On day five, he observed the characteristic cell breakdown that virologists typically attribute to viral presence - except no alleged virus was added. In a second trial, he added yeast RNA to the culture and observed similar cell breakdown.
These results fundamentally challenge virology's foundational methods by demonstrating that the cell breakdown observed in standard virology experiments could occur simply due to the experimental conditions themselves, rather than from any virus. This suggests that the primary evidence used to claim viral existence and pathogenicity might be an artifact of the experimental method rather than proof of viral activity.
Measles “Virus” - Lies are Unbekoming
12. What is the significance of the German court cases regarding virus isolation?
Two significant German court cases challenged virus isolation claims. The first involved Dr. Lanka's offer of 100,000 euros to anyone providing scientific evidence of measles virus existence. While initially ordered to pay, Dr. Lanka won on appeal when Professor Podbielski admitted none of the submitted papers had proper controls. The second case came in 2023 when engineer Marvin Haberland challenged COVID-19 measures by pointing to Germany's Law for Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases, which required scientific methodology.
Haberland's strategy involved demonstrating that virology failed to follow proper scientific methods, particularly regarding control experiments. His success led to multiple similar cases being closed by the courts, suggesting the legal system was unwilling to defend virology's methods when directly challenged. The cases represented significant legal victories for those questioning standard virological practices.
13. What role do genetic sequences play in virus identification, and what are the criticisms?
Genetic sequencing has become a primary method for identifying viruses, but critics argue this approach is fundamentally flawed. Without first isolating a pure virus, it's impossible to know whether the genetic material being sequenced comes from a virus or from other cellular debris. The original genetic sequencing of SARS-CoV-2, for example, involved assembling an in silico (computational) genome from genetic fragments of unknown origin found in lung washings.
Critics also point out that alleged viral variants are merely combinations of genetic fragments patched together in computers to create slightly different overall results. Rather than interpreting failures to match exactly with previously established sequences as experimental failures, researchers simply label these as new variants. This approach, critics argue, creates a circular logic where the existence of the virus is assumed rather than proven.
14. How does the book explain the Spanish Flu pandemic differently from conventional narratives?
The book presents compelling alternative explanations for the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, highlighting Dr. Milton Rosenau's extensive experiments that failed to demonstrate contagion. Despite multiple attempts to transmit the disease through direct exposure - including having sick patients cough directly into healthy volunteers' faces - researchers were unable to reproduce the illness in healthy individuals under controlled conditions.
Alternative explanations for the pandemic include the effects of mass vaccination programs, with reports indicating that vaccinated soldiers experienced seven times more disease than unvaccinated civilians. Additionally, electrical influences are considered, with Arthur Firstenberg suggesting that increased electrification of the world may have contributed to widespread illness. This explanation accounts for why animals in various locations were affected simultaneously without direct contact.
Spanish Flu - Lies are Unbekoming
15. What evidence suggests vaccines weren't responsible for disease decline in historical cases?
Historical data compiled by researchers like Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk show that death rates from various diseases, including whooping cough, measles, and diphtheria, had already declined dramatically before the introduction of their respective vaccines. The improvements correlated more closely with better sanitation, nutrition, and living conditions than with vaccination programs.
This pattern repeated across multiple diseases, including those for which no vaccine was developed. For instance, diseases like typhoid, scarlet fever, and tuberculosis showed significant mortality drops (30-80%) in the second half of the 19th century without vaccines, demonstrating that factors other than vaccination were responsible for disease reduction.
16. How did medical liability protection in 1986 affect vaccine development and safety?
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 provided vaccine manufacturers with effective immunity from liability, fundamentally changing the vaccine landscape. This protection was deemed necessary because manufacturers faced numerous lawsuits due to vaccine injuries. However, removing liability eliminated the financial incentive to ensure vaccine safety.
The impact is reflected in the dramatic increase in childhood vaccines following the act's passage. In 1962, children received three vaccine doses; by 1986, this had increased to twenty-five doses; and by 2023, the number had skyrocketed to at least seventy-three doses, with twenty-eight coming in a child's first year. This massive increase occurred after manufacturers secured protection from legal consequences of vaccine injuries.
1986 Act, Desmet, Fibreglass Logs and Mubongi
17. What are the main concerns regarding childhood vaccine ingredients and testing?
Childhood vaccines contain numerous concerning ingredients including formaldehyde (a known carcinogen), aluminum, thimerosal (mercury-based), and various other chemicals. When the Informed Consent Action Network requested studies establishing the safety of injecting infants with aluminum, the NIH responded that no such records existed. Despite the CDC claiming these ingredients are safe in small amounts, they provide no scientific evidence supporting this claim.
Additionally, vaccine safety trials lack proper controls using inert placebos. Instead, new vaccines are typically tested against other vaccines or adjuvants, making it impossible to determine true safety profiles. The studies are also notably short in duration, precluding the detection of long-term effects. For example, some vaccines were monitored for adverse events for only 48 hours after injection.
Childhood Vaccination - Lies are Unbekoming
18. How does consciousness-centric medicine differ from physicalist approaches?
Consciousness-centric medicine views the body as a vessel or vehicle of consciousness rather than the producer of consciousness. This perspective completely inverts the conventional physicalist model, suggesting that consciousness is primary and the physical world, including our bodies, is a manifestation of consciousness. This approach considers the soul as an individuated portion of consciousness inhabiting a body, rather than seeing consciousness as a product of brain activity.
This fundamental shift in understanding leads to different approaches to healing, considering factors beyond the purely physical. It recognizes that consciousness can directly influence physical health and that healing might involve addressing issues at the level of consciousness rather than just treating physical symptoms. This approach aligns with ancient healing traditions and modern research on mind-body interactions.
19. What is the "One Mind" perspective and how does it relate to healing?
The One Mind perspective suggests that all reality is made of a single, primordial consciousness, of which individual minds are parts - like whirlpools in a stream. This view, supported by quantum physicists like Max Planck and Erwin Schrödinger, suggests that consciousness is fundamental to reality rather than a product of physical processes. This understanding implies that healing can occur through consciousness itself, as all physical reality is ultimately a manifestation of consciousness.
This perspective explains phenomena like spontaneous healing, the placebo effect, and distance healing by recognizing that consciousness can directly influence physical reality. It suggests that healing might occur through shifts in consciousness rather than purely through physical interventions, and that individual health is connected to collective consciousness through this unified field of mind.
20. How do near-death experiences challenge conventional medical understanding?
Near-death experiences (NDEs) present a significant challenge to conventional medical understanding by demonstrating enhanced consciousness when the brain is minimally functioning or clinically dead. People often report experiences that are "realer than real life," including 360-degree vision and complex perceptions, during periods when conventional medicine would predict no conscious experience. This creates what Dr. Bruce Greyson calls a paradox: "at a time when the brain isn't functioning, the mind is functioning better than ever."
These experiences often include verified observations of events occurring during clinical death, suggesting consciousness can function independently of the brain. Some individuals even receive information about deaths they couldn't have known about through normal means. The phenomenon of "terminal lucidity," where severely impaired patients become suddenly clear just before death, further challenges the belief that consciousness is produced by the brain, suggesting instead that the brain might act more like a filter or receiver of consciousness.
21. What is the biofield, and how does it influence human health?
The biofield represents humans as bioelectromagnetic beings who absorb and emit energy, extending beyond the conventional view of bodies as merely collections of chemicals and organs. Dr. Shamini Jain's research demonstrates that altering the geomagnetic field influences human brainwaves and heart rhythms, indicating a deep interconnection between human biology and environmental energy fields. This understanding forms the basis of many traditional medical practices worldwide.
Research on biofield healing has shown remarkable results, including a study where breast cancer survivors experienced complete remission of chronic fatigue after biofield treatments. The healers in these studies describe themselves as facilitators who help realign patients' energy fields and clear blocked energy, leading to the release of toxicity. This approach sees the human body as a bioenergetic system deeply intertwined with its environment.
Interview with Kyle Young - Lies are Unbekoming
22. How do organ transplant cases suggest consciousness extends beyond the brain?
Dr. Paul Pearsall's research on organ transplants revealed remarkable cases where recipients acquired memories and personality traits from their donors. In one case, an eight-year-old girl who received a heart transplant began having nightmares about a murder, providing details that led to the arrest of her donor's killer. Other cases included a man who developed new musical preferences and romantic interests matching his teenage donor's, and a woman who acquired new behavioral patterns after receiving a kidney from a Hispanic donor.
These cases suggest that consciousness and memory might be stored throughout the body, not just in the brain. The transfer of specific memories, preferences, and behavioral traits through organ transplantation challenges the conventional understanding that consciousness is solely a product of brain activity and suggests a more distributed model of consciousness throughout the body's tissues.
23. What role do emotional shocks play in disease according to German New Medicine?
German New Medicine (GNM), developed by Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer, identifies emotional shocks as key triggers for physical ailments, including cancer. The theory suggests that these shocks manifest as specific biological responses depending on how the subconscious mind interprets the emotional conflict. Different types of conflicts, such as "anger in the territory" or "separation from a mate," correlate with specific physical symptoms and conditions.
GNM views symptoms as evidence of the body's healing process rather than the problem itself. The resolution of the emotional conflict triggers specific biological responses, but these healing processes can be interrupted by "tracks" - environmental triggers that reactivate the original trauma. This perspective shifts the focus from suppressing symptoms to understanding and resolving the underlying emotional conflicts that initiated the physical response.
German New Medicine - Lies are Unbekoming
24. How do spontaneous healing cases challenge conventional medical understanding?
The Institute of Noetic Sciences compiled over 3,500 medically documented cases of spontaneous remission from various diseases, suggesting these events are more common than previously believed. These cases often involve complete disease disappearance without medical treatment or with treatment considered inadequate to produce such results. The frequency of these cases appears to be underreported, challenging conventional understanding of disease progression and healing.
Anita Moorjani's case exemplifies this phenomenon. After four years of cancer and organ failure, she experienced a profound near-death experience that led to complete recovery within days. Her doctors couldn't explain how her extensive lymphatic cancer disappeared so rapidly, demonstrating that healing can occur through mechanisms not understood by conventional medicine. These cases suggest that factors beyond physical treatment can trigger profound healing responses in the body.
25. What is the relationship between mind-matter interaction and healing?
Research on mind-matter interaction, particularly through random number generator experiments, demonstrates that human consciousness can influence physical systems in measurable ways. While these effects might be small in controlled experiments, they consistently show that intention can affect physical reality. This has profound implications for understanding how mental states might influence physical health and healing processes.
The impact of collective consciousness on physical systems, as shown in global experiments during major events, suggests that group mental states can have measurable effects on the physical world. This understanding raises questions about how fear and collective emotional states during health crises might influence actual disease manifestation and progression, suggesting that psychological factors play a more significant role in health outcomes than conventionally recognized.
26. How does the placebo/nocebo effect demonstrate mind-body connection?
Research shows that placebos account for 75 percent of antidepressant effects and can cause measurable changes in the brain. Even more remarkably, placebos can mimic the efficacy of actual surgery when no real procedure is performed. These effects demonstrate that belief and expectation alone can trigger powerful healing responses in the body, challenging the conventional focus on physical interventions.
The nocebo effect, where negative expectations produce negative health outcomes, further illustrates the mind-body connection. People can develop symptoms simply from believing they will experience them, even when given an inert substance. This raises important questions about how fear and negative expectations during disease outbreaks might contribute to symptom manifestation, independent of any physical pathogen.
27. What evidence suggests past lives influence current health conditions?
Dr. Ian Stevenson's research at the University of Virginia documented cases of children with birthmarks or physical defects that corresponded to fatal wounds from their claimed previous lives. These physical manifestations were verified against historical records of the deceased persons' injuries, suggesting a "third factor" beyond genetics and environment in determining physical characteristics and health conditions.
The children often displayed specific phobias and philias related to their previous life experiences, with these traits manifesting before they could speak. About 35 percent of cases showed phobias related to the manner of death in the previous life, such as fear of water in cases where the previous person drowned. This research suggests that past-life trauma can manifest as physical and psychological conditions in the present life.
28. How do "between lives" memories relate to health and disease?
Research on "between lives" memories reveals that souls sometimes plan specific health challenges before birth as part of their growth journey. These prebirth agreements or contracts are described as opportunities for spiritual development, even though they may manifest as physical ailments or challenges in life. This perspective suggests that some health conditions might serve a deeper purpose in personal evolution.
Documentation of intermission memories shows a consistent pattern of souls choosing specific life circumstances, including health challenges, before incarnation. This understanding suggests that some diseases or health conditions might be pre-planned experiences rather than random misfortunes, challenging conventional views about the nature and purpose of illness.
29. What role does resonance play in disease transmission according to the book?
Research from the HeartMath Institute demonstrates that people can synchronize their physiological states, particularly heart rhythms, through emotional bonding rather than physical contact. This synchronization can occur even at great distances, suggesting that what appears as disease transmission might sometimes be an energetic resonance phenomenon rather than a physical contagion.
This concept extends to the idea that female roommates' menstrual cycles can synchronize without physical transmission of any substance, demonstrating biological synchronization through non-physical means. The book suggests that some instances of apparent disease transmission might actually reflect this type of resonance between people, particularly when strong emotional bonds exist.
30. How does electromagnetic influence affect human health?
The book presents evidence that human health is significantly influenced by electromagnetic fields, both natural and artificial. Research shows that changes in Earth's magnetic field can affect autonomic nervous system functioning, while increasing electrification of society may contribute to health problems. This relationship was particularly noted in historical disease outbreaks, such as the 1918 influenza pandemic, which coincided with major advances in electrical technology.
The biofield perspective suggests that humans are electromagnetic beings who interact constantly with environmental electromagnetic fields. This understanding raises concerns about modern exposure to artificial electromagnetic fields through wireless technology and suggests that some health conditions attributed to other causes might actually result from electromagnetic disturbances. This view challenges conventional focus on biological pathogens as the primary cause of disease.
Electricity & Disease - Lies are Unbekoming
31. What is morphic resonance and how does it relate to collective health?
Rupert Sheldrake's theory of morphic resonance suggests that memory isn't stored solely in the brain but accessed through a field effect that connects individuals to collective memory. This theory proposes that each individual inherits a collective memory from past members of the species and contributes to this collective memory, affecting future members. The implications extend beyond individual health to suggest a deeper interconnection between all members of a species.
This understanding suggests that health patterns might be influenced by collective memory fields rather than just physical factors. Under this model, individuals both receive information from and contribute to a collective health field, potentially explaining why certain health patterns emerge simultaneously across populations without physical contact. This perspective challenges conventional views of disease transmission and suggests broader implications for understanding collective health phenomena.
Morphic Resonance - Lies are Unbekoming
32. How do spiritual factors influence physical health according to the book?
The book presents evidence from various sources, including Catholic exorcist Father Chad Ripperger and psychiatrist Dr. Richard Gallagher, suggesting that spiritual forces can directly impact physical health. Their work indicates that some health conditions might have spiritual origins rather than purely physical causes. Even in cases of apparent spiritual attack, these experiences are described as potentially serving a higher purpose in personal development and spiritual growth.
Additionally, religious traditions and ancient civilizations recognized spiritual influences on health, viewing illness as potentially related to spiritual factors rather than purely physical causes. Modern healers like Dr. Sha report receiving healing information from spiritual sources, with documented cases of successful treatment following these spiritually-derived methods. This suggests that understanding health may require considering spiritual dimensions typically ignored by conventional medicine.
33. What role does fear play in global health scenarios?
Fear has been identified as a crucial factor in global health scenarios, particularly during the COVID-19 era where mass fear was deliberately cultivated. The book suggests that fear itself can create or exacerbate health problems through the nocebo effect and collective consciousness impacts. This psychological state can manifest physical symptoms even in the absence of any pathogen, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of illness.
The medical-industrial complex may utilize fear as a control mechanism, using health emergencies to implement restrictive measures and maintain dependence on pharmaceutical solutions. This fear-based approach discourages people from taking responsibility for their own health and instead promotes reliance on external authorities and pharmaceutical interventions. The book suggests that fear might be weaponized to maintain control over health choices and personal freedoms.
34. How does medical freedom relate to personal sovereignty?
Personal sovereignty in healthcare involves taking responsibility for one's own health rather than depending solely on the medical system. This includes understanding basic health principles, making informed decisions about treatments, and potentially refusing conventional interventions when appropriate. The book argues that true health freedom is essential for individual liberty, as control over one's medical choices directly impacts personal autonomy.
The COVID-19 era demonstrated how medical mandates can be used to restrict personal freedoms, with vaccine requirements affecting employment, travel, and social participation. This highlighted the connection between medical freedom and broader civil liberties, suggesting that maintaining control over health choices is crucial for preserving individual sovereignty. The book argues that personal health sovereignty is a fundamental aspect of human freedom that needs protection.
35. What is the medical-industrial complex and how does it operate?
The medical-industrial complex operates as an intricate web of financial interests involving pharmaceutical companies, doctors, medical device suppliers, insurance companies, media outlets, politicians, and academic institutions. This system prioritizes profit over healing, creating financial incentives to maintain chronic illness rather than promote genuine health. The complex influences medical education, research funding, and policy decisions to maintain its dominance.
This system perpetuates itself by controlling narrative through media influence, shaping medical education, and influencing political policy through financial contributions. The result is a self-reinforcing system where questioning established medical dogma becomes professionally and financially risky, while maintaining the status quo is rewarded. This creates an environment where true medical innovation and alternative approaches are systematically suppressed.
36. How do ancient healing traditions differ from modern approaches?
Ancient healing traditions, including Ayurvedic, Chinese, and Tibetan medicine, view health holistically and recognize the body's innate healing abilities. These approaches focus on maintaining proper flow of life force energy and see disease as disharmony within oneself or between oneself and the environment. They emphasize prevention and addressing root causes rather than merely suppressing symptoms.
These traditions contrast sharply with modern allopathic medicine's reductionist approach. While modern medicine typically seeks to identify and eliminate specific pathogens or treat isolated symptoms, traditional approaches aim to restore balance and harmony to the whole system. These ancient methods often incorporate spiritual and energetic aspects of healing that are dismissed by conventional medicine.
37. What are the four determinants of illness according to critics?
Critics identify nutrition, toxic exposures, electromagnetic radiation, and stress as the four primary determinants of illness, rather than germs. This perspective suggests that disease symptoms reflect the body's attempt to heal or detoxify from underlying ailments in these categories. This understanding moves away from the germ theory paradigm and towards a more comprehensive view of health and disease.
This framework provides a different lens for understanding illness, suggesting that addressing these four factors could prevent or resolve most health issues. Rather than focusing on fighting germs, this approach emphasizes creating optimal conditions for health through proper nutrition, minimizing toxic exposure, protecting from harmful electromagnetic influences, and managing stress effectively.
38. How does the "less brain, more consciousness" phenomenon challenge medical materialism?
The "less brain, more consciousness" phenomenon refers to cases where reduced brain function correlates with enhanced conscious experience. This is observed in near-death experiences, psychedelic states, and cases of terminal lucidity, where severely impaired patients experience sudden mental clarity before death. These instances challenge the materialist assumption that consciousness is produced by brain activity.
This pattern suggests that the brain might act more as a filter or receiver of consciousness rather than its producer. When brain function is reduced, consciousness might actually be less constrained, allowing for expanded awareness and experience. This understanding fundamentally challenges the materialist foundation of conventional medicine and suggests a different relationship between consciousness and physical biology.
39. What role do belief systems play in maintaining current medical paradigms?
Belief systems in medicine are perpetuated through education, media influence, and professional peer pressure. These beliefs become so ingrained that questioning them can lead to professional ostracism or career consequences. The book suggests that many medical professionals accept current paradigms without critical examination, creating a self-reinforcing system of beliefs that resists change.
The power of these belief systems is demonstrated by how quickly alternative viewpoints are labeled as "misinformation" or "conspiracy theories" without proper examination of evidence. The medical establishment's resistance to new ideas often stems from these entrenched beliefs rather than scientific evidence. This creates a situation where paradigm shifts become extremely difficult, even when evidence suggests current models are flawed.
40. How does categorization of disease influence medical understanding?
Disease categorization often creates artificial distinctions that can mislead medical understanding. The book provides examples, such as how the presence of HIV antibodies would change a tuberculosis diagnosis to an AIDS diagnosis, demonstrating how categorization can mask underlying commonalities in disease processes. This system of categorization can lead to different treatments for similar conditions based on arbitrary distinctions.
Furthermore, the way diseases are categorized can affect statistics and perceived treatment efficacy. For example, the book discusses how polio-like symptoms might be categorized differently based on various factors, leading to skewed data about disease prevalence and vaccine effectiveness. This suggests that medical understanding is significantly influenced by how we choose to categorize and label different conditions.
41. What evidence challenges the concept of viral contagion?
Historical experiments, such as those conducted during the 1918 influenza pandemic, repeatedly failed to demonstrate person-to-person disease transmission under controlled conditions. Dr. Milton Rosenau's extensive experiments showed that despite multiple attempts to infect healthy volunteers through direct exposure to sick patients - including close contact, blood injection, and direct exposure to coughed material - researchers could not reproduce the illness in healthy individuals.
Additionally, Freedom of Information requests to over 200 institutions in 40 countries have failed to produce evidence of proper viral isolation and contagion. Cases like Dr. Robert Willner's public injection of allegedly HIV-infected blood without contracting the disease, and documented cases of failed transmission in various disease outbreaks, further challenge the conventional understanding of viral contagion.
42. How do environmental toxins relate to disease causation?
Environmental toxins play a crucial role in disease causation through various exposure routes including food, water, air, medicines, clothing, cosmetics, and household products. The book presents evidence linking specific disease outbreaks to toxic exposures, such as the correlation between DDT use and polio cases, suggesting that many conditions attributed to viruses might actually result from environmental poisoning.
Modern society's exposure to an unprecedented array of chemical toxins creates conditions for widespread illness that may be misattributed to contagious diseases. The book argues that focusing on viral causes often obscures the role of environmental toxins, leading to ineffective treatments that fail to address the real sources of illness. This understanding suggests that reducing toxic exposure might be more effective in preventing disease than targeting supposed viral pathogens.
43. What role do proper controls play in scientific methodology?
Proper controls are fundamental to scientific validity, yet the book argues they are often absent in virological studies. The example of Dr. Stefan Lanka's control study demonstrated that cell breakdown - typically attributed to viral activity - occurred in cell cultures without any patient samples, suggesting that standard virological procedures might produce misleading results due to lack of proper controls.
This methodological failure extends beyond individual studies to affect entire fields of medical research. Without proper controls, researchers cannot determine whether observed effects result from the factor being studied or from experimental conditions themselves. The book argues that this fundamental flaw in methodology has led to incorrect conclusions being accepted as scientific fact, particularly in virology.
44. How does medical education perpetuate current paradigms?
Medical education is heavily influenced by pharmaceutical industry funding, which shapes curriculum content and student perspectives from the earliest stages of training. Students are taught to memorize and accept established protocols rather than question fundamental assumptions or explore alternative approaches. This creates physicians who function more as technicians for the pharmaceutical industry than independent healers.
The system discourages critical thinking about established medical paradigms through both explicit curriculum choices and implicit professional pressures. Those who challenge conventional wisdom often face academic and professional consequences, creating a self-perpetuating system where new doctors replicate the approaches of their predecessors without questioning basic assumptions about health and disease.
45. What is the relationship between medical control and societal control?
The COVID-19 era demonstrated how health emergencies can be used to implement broad societal controls, with medical mandates affecting fundamental freedoms of movement, assembly, and personal choice. The book suggests that medical authority has become a powerful tool for implementing social control measures that would otherwise face stronger resistance.
The medical-industrial complex, through its influence on media, education, and policy, shapes public perception of health threats and appropriate responses. This control over health narratives enables broader societal control through fear-based manipulation, with medical authorities positioned as unquestionable experts whose directives must be followed for public safety.
46. How do antiviral drugs work according to critics?
Critics argue that antiviral drugs don't actually target viruses but instead function as antimetabolic agents that interfere with cellular processes. Dr. Samantha Bailey suggests these drugs work similarly to chemotherapy, not by attacking specific pathogens but by generally disrupting cellular metabolism. The apparent effectiveness of these drugs in reducing "viral load" may actually reflect their impact on normal cellular processes rather than any specific antiviral activity.
The reduction in genetic sequences typically attributed to viral presence during antiviral treatment might instead reflect changes in normal cellular genetic material, as the origin of these sequences hasn't been conclusively proven to be viral. This perspective suggests that antiviral medications might work through mechanisms entirely different from those claimed by conventional medicine.
47. What role does consciousness play in spontaneous healing?
Consciousness appears central to spontaneous healing cases, with documented instances of complete recovery following shifts in consciousness or perspective. Anita Moorjani's case exemplifies this, where a profound near-death experience led to rapid recovery from terminal cancer. These cases suggest that consciousness can directly influence physical health outcomes in ways that challenge conventional medical understanding.
The book presents evidence that healing often involves shifts in belief systems, emotional resolution, or expanded states of consciousness rather than purely physical interventions. This suggests that consciousness might be a primary factor in both disease development and healing, with physical symptoms reflecting states of consciousness rather than purely material causes.
48. How does the medical system's approach to chronic disease reveal its limitations?
The current medical system's handling of chronic disease demonstrates its fundamental limitations, with 60 percent of American adults having at least one chronic disease and 40 percent having two or more. Despite massive investments in research and treatment, conditions like heart disease and cancer continue to increase, suggesting the current approach is ineffective at addressing root causes.
The system's focus on symptom management through long-term medication rather than addressing underlying causes creates ongoing dependence on pharmaceutical interventions. This approach often leads to additional health problems from medication side effects, requiring more medications in a perpetual cycle that serves financial interests while failing to produce genuine healing.
49. What solutions are proposed for transforming the medical system?
Proposed solutions include shifting from a reductionist to a holistic approach that considers physical, emotional, and spiritual aspects of health. This transformation would involve recognizing the role of consciousness in health, understanding the body's innate healing abilities, and addressing root causes rather than merely suppressing symptoms. The book suggests incorporating insights from traditional healing systems while maintaining beneficial aspects of modern medicine.
The transformation would also require breaking free from pharmaceutical industry influence on medical education and practice, establishing truly independent research, and empowering individuals to take responsibility for their own health. This includes recognizing the role of nutrition, toxic exposure, electromagnetic influences, and stress in health outcomes rather than focusing primarily on germ theory.
50. How might future pandemic scenarios be approached differently given these perspectives?
A transformed approach to future pandemics would focus on understanding and addressing root causes rather than assuming viral causation. This would include investigating environmental toxins, electromagnetic influences, and psychological factors that might contribute to widespread illness. The approach would emphasize supporting natural immunity and overall health rather than relying primarily on pharmaceutical interventions.
Such an approach would resist fear-based responses and maintain respect for individual health sovereignty while taking reasonable precautions. Rather than implementing broad societal controls, the focus would be on empowering individuals with information about maintaining health and supporting natural healing processes. This would represent a fundamental shift from current pandemic responses that emphasize pharmaceutical solutions and centralized control.
I appreciate you being here.
If you've found the content interesting, useful and maybe even helpful, please consider supporting it through a small paid subscription. While everything here is free, your paid subscription is important as it helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. It also helps keep it free for those that cannot afford to pay.
Please make full use of the Free Libraries.
Unbekoming Interview Library: Great interviews across a spectrum of important topics.
Unbekoming Book Summary Library: Concise summaries of important books.
Stories
I'm always in search of good stories, people with valuable expertise and helpful books. Please don't hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com
For COVID vaccine injury
Consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment as a resource.
Baseline Human Health
Watch and share this profound 21-minute video to understand and appreciate what health looks like without vaccination.
I have a question that I hope someone can answer. I'm a big fan of the book, The moth in the iron lung by Maready as it opened my eyes to polio root causes. If polio is not a viral disease, what antigen is in the polio vaccine that can also induce polio symptoms?
The final question of your post is critical. We all need to move away from dependency on allopathic care. Do not expect our governments/healthcare to change. We need to do it. Still, I see many health aware people still thinking they need an allopathic primary care doctor and this is still the main person they see for their health concerns. Why?
This is excellent. I think this book would be a good gift. His other books look interesting also.