Confessions of a Medical Heretic (1979)

By Dr. Robert Mendelsohn – 50 Q&As – Unbekoming Book Summary

I’d like to start the year with Mendelsohn.

Though he authored only three books, each is a must-read classic.

His searing clarity in exposing the corrupt religious enterprise he labels Modern Medicine is unmatched.

The chilling warning to avoid doctors—especially pediatricians, a profession he himself belonged to—is unforgettable.

While no summary can truly capture the power of his words, it’s certainly better than leaving them unshared.

With gratitude to Dr. Robert Mendelsohn.

Related

• Family

• Temples

• Diagnosis

• The Devil's Priests

• Mutilation

• Male Practice

Analogy

Modern Medicine is like a powerful religious cult that has taken over a town's only auto repair shop. The mechanics (doctors) claim exclusive authority to fix cars (bodies) and insist that only they can interpret the warning lights (symptoms). They've convinced everyone that regular, expensive inspections are necessary even when cars run perfectly, and they routinely replace parts that don't need replacing.

These mechanics intentionally use complex technical language to confuse car owners and insist that only they can understand the mysterious workings of engines. They've made it illegal for car owners to fix their own vehicles or seek help from independent mechanics (alternative healers). Despite charging ever-increasing prices and causing frequent damage through unnecessary repairs, they maintain their monopoly by allying with insurance companies and government regulators.

The truth is that most cars, like most bodies, are remarkably well-engineered and can maintain themselves with proper care (nutrition, exercise, rest). They mainly need good fuel, regular maintenance (healthy lifestyle), and occasional help during genuine emergencies. The mechanics are necessary only for serious repairs, but they've created a system where they control every aspect of car maintenance, while actively discouraging owners from learning basic car care or trusting their own judgment about their vehicles' performance.

The solution isn't to eliminate mechanics entirely, but to strip away their cult-like power, return basic car maintenance to the owners, and restore mechanics to their proper role: skilled technicians who help only when truly needed.

12-point summary

1. Modern Medicine as Religion: Modern Medicine functions as a religious system complete with priests (doctors), temples (hospitals), sacraments (drugs and procedures), and requires absolute faith from its followers while discouraging questioning.

2. Hospital Dangers: Hospitals present significant risks with one in twenty patients acquiring infections. They suffer from poor cleanliness, dangerous germs, psychological trauma, and widespread malnutrition affecting 25-50% of patients.

3. Doctor Psychology: The medical profession shows alarming rates of psychological problems, with 17,000 psychiatrically disturbed physicians, 30,000 alcoholics, and twice the average suicide rate, indicating systemic issues in medical culture.

4. Medical Education Flaws: Medical school selection and training creates poor doctors through fear-based education, sleep deprivation, and emphasis on intervention over healing, while selecting students for compliance rather than caring abilities.

5. Drug Dangers: Prescription drugs kill more people than illegal street drugs, with widespread overuse of antibiotics and other medications. Drug companies spend $6,000 per doctor annually to influence prescribing habits.

6. Research Integrity: Medical research frequently proves unreliable due to fraud, manipulation, and financial conflicts of interest, with many clinical trials never actually performed or results falsified.

7. Birth and Breastfeeding: Hospital births carry significantly higher risks than home births, with babies six times more likely to suffer distress and thirty times more likely to be permanently injured. Formula feeding increases numerous health risks compared to breastfeeding.

8. Unnecessary Surgery: Up to 90% of surgeries may be unnecessary, with studies showing many common procedures lack scientific justification. Annual physical examinations show no evidence of improving health outcomes.

9. Laboratory Testing: Medical testing laboratories demonstrate shocking inaccuracy rates, with up to 50% failing simple clinical chemistry tests and significant disagreement among radiologists interpreting the same x-rays.

10. Family Health: Modern Medicine systematically undermines family structure by separating families during critical health events and replacing family support with professional intervention.

11. Medical Politics: The system maintains power through political alliances, licensing controls, and insurance systems, while medicalizing social problems to extend its authority and control.

12. The New Medicine: A proposed alternative emphasizing prevention, natural healing, and family-centered care, with doctors serving as educators and "lifeguards" rather than authoritarian figures.

50 Questions & Answers

Question 1: How does Mendelsohn draw parallels between Modern Medicine and organized religion?

Modern Medicine exhibits all the defining characteristics of an organized religion, complete with its own sacred language, rituals, and beliefs. Like traditional religions that deal with birth, death, and the mysteries of existence, Modern Medicine positions itself as the mediator between individuals and powerful forces they cannot face alone. The doctor serves as high priest, with specialized knowledge transmitted through sacred texts, speaking in a language designed to keep outsiders ignorant and maintain authority.

The hospital functions as the temple where sacred rituals take place, diagnostic procedures serve as confessionals, and treatments become sacraments that must be accepted on faith. Just as religions promote and relieve guilt, Modern Medicine has invalidated old guilts while creating new ones - the greatest "sin" being not going to the doctor. The parallel extends to the requirement of total faith, as Modern Medicine relies so heavily on belief that if everyone simply forgot to believe in it for one day, the entire system would collapse.

Question 2: What role do doctors play in this "religious" structure of Modern Medicine?

Doctors function as the priests of Modern Medicine, wielding enormous power through their ability to interpret mysterious symptoms and prescribe sacred treatments. They maintain their authority through specialized language, ritualistic examinations, and by fostering dependency through fear. Like religious priests who claim direct communication with divine powers, doctors position themselves as exclusive intermediaries between patients and the healing forces of modern technology.

The doctor-priest gets away with mistakes by claiming to be up against forces of evil (disease), making them heroes whether they win or lose. When successful, they're conquering heroes; when they fail, they're defeated heroes - but still heroes. This religious role allows them to escape blame while maintaining their position of authority, even when their treatments cause harm.

Question 3: What are the "sacraments" of Modern Medicine according to the book?

The primary sacraments of Modern Medicine include drugs, surgery, and diagnostic procedures that patients must accept on faith rather than evidence. These modern sacraments are often more dangerous than traditional religious sacraments - prescription drugs kill more people than illegal street drugs, and surgical procedures are performed unnecessarily in up to ninety percent of cases. Other sacraments include routine physical examinations, immunizations, and various screening procedures.

Modern Medicine also has its "Holy Waters" - silver nitrate in newborns' eyes, routine intravenous fluids, immunizations, and fluoridation of water supplies. These are automatically imposed whether needed or not, and their safety is questionable. Yet they have been elevated to sacred status and are often enforced by law, demonstrating how Modern Medicine has gained both religious and legal authority over people's lives.

Question 4: How does Modern Medicine maintain its power through faith and ritual?

Modern Medicine maintains its power by requiring absolute faith in its procedures and practitioners while discouraging questioning or skepticism. Patients must submit to treatments without understanding them, much like religious followers accepting mysterious rituals. The system creates dependency by making people fear their own bodies and natural processes, causing them to rely on medical authority for even basic health decisions.

This power is reinforced through ritualistic procedures like annual check-ups, routine testing, and standardized treatments that have little scientific basis but serve to demonstrate the doctor's authority. The use of complex machinery, specialized language, and impressive technology further mystifies the process and reinforces the need for faith in medical authority, even when treatments are ineffective or harmful.

Question 5: What evidence suggests Modern Medicine functions more as a religion than a science?

The most compelling evidence lies in medicine's resistance to scientific scrutiny of its practices. When doctors are confronted with evidence that certain procedures or treatments are ineffective or harmful, they often continue these practices based on belief rather than proof. For example, studies showing that annual check-ups don't improve health outcomes haven't changed this ritualistic practice. Similarly, evidence that many surgeries are unnecessary hasn't significantly reduced their frequency.

The profession's response to doctor strikes provides another clear indication - death rates consistently drop when doctors go on strike, sometimes by as much as 50%. Yet this scientific evidence contradicting the value of routine medical care is ignored in favor of maintaining established practices. The system's priority is maintaining its authority and power rather than improving health outcomes through scientific evaluation of its methods.

Question 6: What are the primary dangers in modern hospitals?

Hospitals harbor unique and dangerous germs that patients can't get anywhere else, partially due to the overuse of antibiotics creating resistant strains. The physical environment itself is hazardous - dirty corners, contaminated air handling systems, and complex plumbing systems that can cross-contaminate. Medical devices and equipment frequently spread infections, with about half of hospital-acquired infections caused by contaminated medical devices such as catheters and intravenous equipment.

The risk of getting an infection in the hospital is approximately one in twenty, with some wards, particularly pediatric and newborn nurseries, being especially vulnerable. Staff members often become carriers of dangerous bacteria without being affected themselves, making them unwitting spreaders of disease. Additionally, hospitals are filled with dangerous chemicals, poisonous solvents, flammable materials, and radioactive wastes that threaten contamination.

Question 7: How do hospital conditions contribute to patient infections?

Hospital conditions create perfect breeding grounds for dangerous infections through multiple factors. Housekeeping staffs are typically understaffed, leading to inadequate cleaning and accumulation of dangerous organic waste. The concentration of sick people, combined with the presence of various biological wastes, creates an environment where bacteria can thrive and develop resistance to antibiotics. The hospital's heating and air conditioning systems then spread these contaminants throughout the building.

The situation is worsened by medical staff who often fail to follow basic hygiene procedures. Doctors frequently neglect to wash their hands between patients, and protective equipment like masks and gloves often become contaminated themselves. The ritualistic belief in the cleansing power of white coats and hospital gowns creates a false sense of security while actually contributing to the spread of infection.

Question 8: Why does hospital malnutrition occur so frequently?

Hospital malnutrition affects between twenty-five to fifty percent of patients because the system prioritizes medical procedures over basic nutritional needs. Studies have shown that half of surgery patients don't receive adequate protein and calories, with half of these being severely malnourished enough to threaten their recovery. The hospital schedule and staff often interfere with patients' meals through constant interruptions for tests, therapy, and other procedures.

The psychological environment of hospitals also contributes to malnutrition by destroying patients' appetites through stress, fear, and isolation. Even when food is provided, it's often unpalatable or served at inappropriate times. The situation is particularly dangerous for elderly patients, as malnutrition has been identified as one of the most common causes of death among older people in hospitals.

Question 9: What psychological effects do hospitals have on patients?

Hospitals create profound psychological damage through systematic dehumanization and isolation. From the moment of admission, patients are stripped of their identity - their clothes are taken away, they're reduced to numbers and symptoms, and they're separated from their normal support systems. The environment encourages despair and debilitation rather than hope and healing, with patients surrounded by suffering and death while being subjected to impersonal, mechanized care.

The psychological impact is especially severe on children and elderly patients. Children often regress in their development after hospital stays, losing skills like toilet training or speech capabilities. Elderly patients frequently become disoriented and depressed due to the isolation and loss of dignity. The entire hospital experience is designed to break the spirit and create compliance rather than promote healing.

Question 10: How can patients protect themselves in hospitals?

The most effective protection in hospitals comes from having a family member or close friend present at all times to act as an advocate and witness. This person should monitor medication administration, ensure proper food intake, accompany the patient to tests and procedures, and generally make trouble when necessary to ensure proper care. They should ask questions about all procedures, insist on hand-washing by staff, and maintain a connection to the patient's real life and identity.

Patients should also avoid unnecessary hospitalization whenever possible by questioning the need for admission and leaving as soon as feasible. When hospitalization is necessary, patients should bring their own food if possible, maintain as much personal control as they can, and be prepared to challenge hospital rules that separate them from family support. The book suggests that being labeled "uncooperative" by hospital staff often indicates that a patient is well-protected.

Question 11: What evidence suggests widespread overuse of antibiotics?

Every year, 8-10 million Americans who visit doctors for colds receive prescriptions, with about half being for antibiotics. These prescriptions are useless since antibiotics have no effect on viral conditions like colds and flu. Studies show antibiotics don't shorten the course of these illnesses, prevent complications, or reduce pathogenic organisms in the nose and throat. The practice continues despite clear evidence that antibiotics can cause reactions ranging from skin rashes to anaphylactic shock.

This overuse has led to the development of resistant bacterial strains. Gonorrhea, for example, now requires much larger doses of penicillin to treat than it once did, and some strains have become completely resistant. The medical establishment responds by creating stronger antibiotics with more severe side effects, leading to a dangerous escalation where germs grow stronger while patients grow weaker.

Question 12: How do drug companies influence medical practice?

Drug companies spend an average of $6,000 per year on each doctor in the United States to influence their prescribing habits. Company salesmen ("detail men") build profitable relationships with doctors through wining, dining, and providing favors and samples. Most information doctors receive about drugs comes from these company representatives and advertising in medical journals, rather than independent research.

The relationship between doctors and drug companies is so cozy that even clinical trials are compromised. FDA spot checks found 20% of doctors conducting drug trials were guilty of unethical practices, including giving incorrect dosages and falsifying records. In one-third of cases, the trial hadn't been conducted at all, and in another third, the experimental protocol wasn't followed properly.

Question 13: What are the dangers of drug combinations?

Drug combinations create dangerous potentiating effects where the risk of adverse reactions multiplies exponentially. When multiple drugs are taken simultaneously, their individual risk percentages can add up to more than 100%, virtually guaranteeing toxic effects. Furthermore, when drugs interact, their strength can be multiplied by factors of two, three, four, or more, creating unpredictable and potentially deadly consequences.

The danger is compounded by the current era of poly-pharmacy, where it's common for patients to take multiple drugs prescribed by different doctors. Many doctors aren't aware of all the medications their patients are taking, and even when they are, they may not know all the possible interactions. The PDR lists dangerous drug combinations, but doctors often fail to consult it or ignore its warnings.

Question 14: Why are dangerous drugs kept on the market?

Dangerous drugs remain on the market because Modern Medicine's power structure protects them. Even when drugs are proven harmful, the medical establishment often continues prescribing them rather than admit error. For example, reserpine continues to be prescribed for high blood pressure despite studies showing it triples the risk of breast cancer. Similarly, insulin is still celebrated as a medical miracle despite evidence linking it to diabetic blindness.

The system is maintained through a network of mutual self-interest between drug companies, doctors, and regulatory agencies. Drug companies fund research that supports their products, doctors receive financial benefits for prescribing these drugs, and regulatory agencies are often staffed by individuals with ties to the pharmaceutical industry. The profit motive outweighs concerns about patient safety.

Question 15: How do doctors justify prescribing potentially harmful medications?

Doctors justify harmful prescriptions through a distorted ethical framework that prioritizes intervention over safety. Their motto has shifted from "First do no harm" to "First do something." They rationalize that the greatest harm comes from not giving patients something, whether or not that something is effective or safe. This mindset is reinforced by their training, which teaches them to view aggressive intervention as inherently good.

The justification process is aided by doctors' tendency to withhold information about side effects from patients. They claim this protects the doctor-patient relationship, but it actually protects their authority by keeping patients ignorant. When confronted with evidence of harm, doctors often shift blame to the patient by claiming they came too late for treatment or didn't follow instructions properly.

Question 16: Why does Mendelsohn advocate for home births?

More than ninety-five percent of births to healthy women can and should occur outside the hospital. Hospital births carry significantly higher risks: babies born in hospitals are six times more likely to suffer distress during labor and delivery, eight times more likely to get caught in the birth canal, four times more likely to need resuscitation, four times more likely to become infected, and thirty times more likely to be permanently injured. Their mothers are three times more likely to hemorrhage.

Home birth allows the entire family to participate in the birth experience, maintaining the natural bonds that hospitals disrupt. When birth occurs at home, the mother maintains control over her body and the birth process, avoiding unnecessary medical interventions like episiotomies, anesthesia, and Caesarean sections. The emotional and psychological benefits for both mother and child are significant, as they remain in a familiar, supportive environment.

Question 17: What are the specific dangers of hospital births?

Hospital births transform a natural process into a surgical procedure through layers of unnecessary "treatment." Each intervention requires another to compensate for its adverse effects. The process begins with routine procedures like shaving and intravenous fluids, progresses through anesthesia that prevents the mother from participating actively in delivery, and often culminates in unnecessary episiotomies or Caesarean sections.

Fetal monitoring, while presented as a safety measure, actually increases the likelihood of Caesarean delivery by three to four times. The practice of inducing labor for the doctor's convenience can result in premature births and their associated complications. Additionally, hospitals separate mothers from their babies during crucial bonding periods, interfere with breastfeeding initiation, and create an environment of fear and anxiety that can complicate the birth process.

Question 18: Why is breastfeeding superior to formula feeding?

Human milk is biologically designed for human babies, while cow's milk is for calves. Bottlefed babies face substantially higher risks of numerous illnesses including diarrhea, colic, gastrointestinal and respiratory infections, meningitis, asthma, allergies, pneumonia, eczema, obesity, hypertension, and sudden infant death syndrome. From a scientific standpoint, formula feeding cannot be considered an acceptable alternative to breastfeeding, especially since more than ninety-nine percent of mothers are capable of breastfeeding.

Breastfeeding also provides crucial benefits for both mother and child beyond nutrition. It promotes better bone maturation and intellectual development in infants, provides protection against infectious diseases through the mother's immune system, and helps protect mothers from breast cancer. The bond between mother and child is strengthened through breastfeeding, providing both physical and emotional benefits that formula feeding cannot replicate.

Question 19: How does Modern Medicine undermine family structure?

Modern Medicine systematically attacks family structure by separating family members during critical life events and substituting professional intervention for family support. This begins with childbirth, where fathers and family members are often excluded, continues through childhood illnesses where parents are limited in hospital visits, and extends to end-of-life care where dying patients are isolated from loved ones in intensive care units.

The system further undermines families by discouraging mothers from trusting their instincts and family traditions in favor of expert advice. Mothers are taught to doubt their ability to feed and care for their children, creating dependency on medical professionals. The medical establishment promotes small, isolated nuclear families over extended family networks, making people more dependent on medical institutions rather than family support systems for health care.

Question 20: What role should family play in healthcare?

Family should be the primary unit of health care, with the home serving as the temple of the New Medicine. Strong families provide support during illness, maintain cultural health traditions, and offer protection against unhealthy institutional practices. When family members band together, they can effectively resist dangerous medical interventions and maintain control over their health decisions.

The family's role includes participating in births, caring for sick members, supporting elderly relatives, and passing down health knowledge between generations. Rather than being viewed as a liability, as Modern Medicine suggests, family should be recognized as an asset that provides emotional, physical, and practical support during health challenges. Extended family networks are particularly important in maintaining health and preventing unnecessary medical interventions.

Question 21: What are the problems with laboratory testing accuracy?

Testing laboratories demonstrate shocking levels of inaccuracy according to Center for Disease Control surveys. Ten to forty percent of bacteriologic testing was unsatisfactory, thirty to fifty percent failed simple clinical chemistry tests, and twelve to eighteen percent failed blood grouping and typing. In tests for specific conditions, thirty-one percent of labs couldn't identify sickle cell anemia, and up to twenty percent incorrectly identified specimens as indicating leukemia.

Even more disturbing, five to twelve percent of labs found problems in completely healthy specimens. One study found that 197 out of 200 people were "cured" of their abnormalities simply by repeating their lab tests. The CDC monitors less than ten percent of the country's labs, meaning these results represent the best work of the best labs. The situation with unmonitored labs is likely much worse.

Question 22: Why are x-rays overused and dangerous?

X-rays represent one of the most pervasive and dangerous diagnostic tools, with doctors using them indiscriminately despite clear evidence of harm. Thyroid cancer can develop from radiation exposure equivalent to ten bite-wing dental x-rays. Studies have linked medical radiation to diabetes, cardiovascular disease, stroke, high blood pressure, cataracts, and various cancers. Conservative estimates attribute 4,000 deaths annually to medical and dental radiation.

The overuse continues despite evidence showing x-rays' unreliability. Studies found that radiologists disagree with each other's interpretations up to twenty-four percent of the time, and even disagree with their own previous readings thirty-one percent of the time. Yet x-rays remain sacred in most medical practices, with doctors insisting on them even for healthy patients or situations where they're clearly unnecessary.

Question 23: How reliable are EKGs and EEGs?

EKG reliability is highly questionable, with studies showing expert interpreters varying by twenty percent among individuals and another twenty percent when the same individuals re-read the same tracing. EKGs delivered positive findings in only twenty-five percent of proven heart attack cases, equivocal findings in half, and completely negative findings in the rest. More than half of readings from healthy people were grossly abnormal.

EEGs show similar unreliability. Twenty percent of people with clinically established convulsive disorders never show abnormal EEGs, while fifteen to twenty percent of perfectly normal people have abnormal EEGs. In one demonstration of EEG unreliability, a researcher connected one to a mannequin's head filled with lime jello and got a reading indicating "life." Despite these problems, both tests continue to be widely used and treated as definitive diagnostic tools.

Question 24: What makes annual physical examinations unnecessary?

Annual physical examinations have shown no evidence of improving health outcomes or extending life expectancy over the past fifty years. People who faithfully submit to yearly check-ups live no longer and are no healthier than those who avoid doctors. The examination process itself carries risks through exposure to dangerous diagnostic procedures, unnecessary testing, and the possibility of false positives leading to harmful treatments.

These exams often serve primarily to recruit patients for unnecessary treatments. During the Depression of the 1930s, doctors began promoting routine check-ups for financial reasons rather than medical necessity. The practice continues today despite lack of evidence supporting its value, driven by doctors' need to maintain a steady patient flow and the medical system's desire to identify "pre-conditions" that can be treated with dangerous medications.

Question 25: How do diagnostic procedures often lead to unnecessary treatments?

Diagnostic procedures frequently identify minor variations or "statistical abnormalities" that doctors then treat as serious conditions requiring intervention. For example, a minor fluctuation in blood sugar might be interpreted as pre-diabetes, leading to unnecessary medication. Similarly, a stray tracing on an EKG might result in prescription of dangerous pre-coronary drugs, even when the patient is healthy.

The problem is compounded by the medical system's tendency to perform batteries of tests, knowing that almost anyone subjected to thirty or forty tests will show at least one "abnormality." These findings then trigger a cascade of additional tests and treatments, each carrying its own risks. The process serves the system's financial interests while exposing patients to unnecessary procedures and medications that often cause more harm than the original "condition."

Question 26: What psychological problems are common among doctors?

Conservative counts identify 17,000 psychiatrically disturbed physicians, more than 30,000 alcoholic doctors, and 3,500 drug addicts among U.S. physicians. A thirty-year study found that by the end, nearly half of doctors were divorced or unhappily married, more than a third used drugs like amphetamines or barbiturates, and a third had suffered emotional problems requiring extensive psychiatric help. Doctors are thirty to one hundred times more likely than lay people to abuse narcotics.

The suicide rate among doctors is twice the average for white Americans, with about 100 doctors committing suicide yearly - equivalent to an entire medical school graduating class. Female physicians have a suicide rate nearly four times higher than other women over age twenty-five. These statistics reveal a profession marked by profound psychological distress and addiction issues, far exceeding the general population's rates.

Question 27: Why do doctors rarely report incompetent colleagues?

Despite fierce competition in medical school and cutthroat medical politics, doctors demonstrate remarkable reluctance to report colleagues' incompetence or dangerous behavior. When hospitals discover malpractice by staff doctors, they typically ask for quiet resignations rather than reporting to authorities. Even in cases of serious misconduct or repeated fatal errors, doctors often receive positive recommendations when seeking new positions.

This protection stems from a combination of fear and arrogance. The resentment doctors learn to feel toward each other as students transforms into solidarity against outside threats once they're practicing. Any mistake by a single doctor threatens the security of all doctors by exposing the system's flaws. Therefore, protecting even incompetent colleagues becomes necessary to maintain the profession's power and authority.

Question 28: How does medical education create fearful doctors?

Medical education deliberately uses fear as a tool to mold students into compliant practitioners. Students are maliciously fatigued through grueling schedules, especially night work, weakening their will and ability to resist indoctrination. They're taught to fear failure, missing diagnoses, malpractice suits, peer criticism, and ultimately, having to find honest work outside medicine.

This fear-based training produces doctors driven by insecurity, seeking excessive security that's never satisfied. Their practice becomes defensive rather than healing-oriented, leading to over-testing and over-treatment to avoid missing anything that might result in criticism or lawsuits. The fear instilled during training never leaves, creating a profession characterized by defensive practice and emotional distance from patients.

Question 29: Why do doctors maintain professional distance from patients?

Doctors maintain distance from patients because their training teaches them that emotional involvement interferes with proper medical judgment. They're taught to view patients not as people but as collections of symptoms to be treated. This distancing serves multiple purposes: it protects doctors from emotional strain, maintains their authority, and prevents patients from questioning their decisions.

The professional distance also reflects doctors' tendency to restrict their friendships to other doctors, limiting their exposure to different viewpoints. Close friendships between doctors and non-doctors are rare, allowing doctors to develop their philosophy in relative isolation. This isolation reinforces their sense of superiority and their belief that patients cannot understand or participate meaningfully in medical decisions.

Question 30: What motivates doctors to overprescribe and over-treat?

Doctors are motivated to overprescribe and over-treat by both financial incentives and their training that emphasizes intervention over observation. They receive more reward and recognition for doing something rather than waiting to see if a condition resolves naturally. The system rewards aggressive intervention while punishing conservative approaches that might allow natural healing.

The motivation extends beyond money to include maintaining professional authority. By prescribing medications and treatments for every complaint, doctors reinforce their role as necessary intermediaries between patients and health. This creates dependency and ensures continued patient visits, even when interventions are unnecessary or harmful.

Question 31: How does medical school selection process affect healthcare?

The medical school admission process selects students based on quantitative tests and grade point averages that favor those who are unable or unwilling to communicate effectively with people. The process chooses individuals most susceptible to authoritarian influences, who have the compulsion to succeed but lack the integrity to rebel against harmful practices. These selection criteria ensure students will passively accept training without questioning destructive aspects of medical practice.

This selection process actively works against choosing students who might make good doctors. Those with strong humanitarian instincts, critical thinking skills, or resistance to authority are often screened out. The result is a profession populated by individuals chosen more for their ability to conform and compete than for their capacity to heal and care for others.

Question 32: What aspects of medical education need reform?

Medical education requires fundamental reform in its approach to teaching healing versus technological intervention. Students need training in ethics, literature, and communication skills alongside medical science. They should learn about iatrogenic disease, the risks of medical procedures, and alternative healing approaches. The current focus on specialization and technology needs to shift toward understanding whole-person health and natural healing processes.

The educational environment itself needs transformation from one of fear and competition to one of support and collaboration. Students should be encouraged to maintain outside interests and relationships rather than becoming isolated within medical culture. The curriculum should include exposure to various healing traditions and emphasize prevention and nutrition rather than just disease treatment.

Question 33: How does medical training create poor doctors?

Medical training creates poor doctors by emphasizing memorization of often-obsolete information over development of critical thinking and healing skills. The half-life of medical education is four years, meaning half of what students learn becomes obsolete in that time, yet they aren't told which half. Students are forced to learn everything without developing the judgment to determine what's truly important.

The training process also damages students psychologically through sleep deprivation, constant stress, and systematic humiliation. This creates doctors who are emotionally damaged, physically exhausted, and trained to value technical procedures over human interaction. The result is practitioners who are well-versed in intervention but poor at prevention and natural healing.

Question 34: Why do medical students become corrupt during training?

Medical students learn corruption begins early, starting with pre-medical training where they learn to cheat and compete ruthlessly to gain admission to medical school. The corruption continues through medical school where students learn to falsify lab results, hire others to write papers, and fabricate research results. This behavior pattern eventually leads to research fraud and dangerous prescribing practices in their professional lives.

The system encourages this corruption by rewarding compliance and punishing integrity. Students who question practices or suggest alternatives face ridicule or dismissal. Those who adapt to the corrupt system advance, creating a self-perpetuating cycle of ethical compromise. The end result is a profession where dishonesty becomes normalized and patient welfare becomes secondary to maintaining the system.

Question 35: What would the "New Medical School" look like?

The New Medical School would emphasize ethics and justice alongside medical science, requiring all disciplines to examine their practices through various ethical frameworks. It would include strong departments of iatrogenic disease, where professors would be paid to investigate how medical care causes harm. The curriculum would incorporate alternative healing approaches and emphasize prevention over intervention.

Students would be selected based on their humanitarian qualities and ability to communicate rather than just test scores. They would be encouraged to marry and maintain outside relationships during training, creating doctors with real-life experience. The education would focus on developing judgment and critical thinking skills rather than just memorizing procedures, producing doctors capable of seeing patients as whole people rather than collections of symptoms.

Question 36: What role does nutrition play in health?

Food is one of the most important determinants of health, yet Modern Medicine largely ignores nutrition. Doctors receive minimal training in nutrition and often disregard its importance in preventing and treating disease. The system focuses on drugs and surgery while dismissing the fundamental role of food quality in maintaining health. Those concerned with nutrition are often labeled as faddists or extremists.

Traditional cultures and other medical systems recognize food's central importance to health. However, Western medicine, like Christianity, substituted symbolic, sacramental food (drugs) for real food. Modern Medicine's disregard for nutrition leads to hospital malnutrition and ignorance of dietary factors in disease causation.

Question 37: How can natural healing processes be supported?

Natural healing requires recognizing the body's innate ability to heal itself when given proper support. This includes adequate nutrition, rest, exercise, and emotional support from family and community. The healing process should occur within the context of the home whenever possible, allowing natural support systems to function effectively.

Instead of aggressive medical intervention, natural healing emphasizes creating conditions that allow the body to restore its own balance. This means avoiding harmful medications and procedures that interfere with natural processes while supporting the body's self-healing mechanisms through proper diet, lifestyle changes, and stress reduction.

Question 38: What alternatives to Modern Medicine are suggested?

Alternatives include home birth, breastfeeding, nutritional therapy, and family-centered healthcare. These approaches emphasize prevention and natural healing over technological intervention. The book advocates for a return to traditional healing wisdom while incorporating valuable modern knowledge when appropriate.

Community-based health care, involving extended family networks and local support systems, provides another alternative to institutional medicine. These approaches recognize health as a product of lifestyle, nutrition, and social support rather than medical intervention.

Question 39: Why are alternative treatments often more effective?

Alternative treatments often prove more effective because they work with natural processes rather than against them. They typically have fewer side effects and support the body's innate healing abilities rather than suppressing symptoms. These approaches consider the whole person - physical, emotional, and social aspects - rather than just treating isolated symptoms.

These treatments also tend to be less dangerous than conventional medical interventions because they don't rely on powerful drugs or invasive procedures. They often produce better long-term results because they address underlying causes rather than merely suppressing symptoms.

Question 40: How can people maintain health without doctors?

People can maintain health by taking responsibility for their own wellbeing through proper nutrition, exercise, and lifestyle choices. This includes building strong family and community support systems, avoiding harmful substances, and learning to trust natural body processes rather than rushing to medical intervention for every complaint.

The key is education about health maintenance and disease prevention, combined with the courage to resist unnecessary medical interventions. People should learn to distinguish between situations requiring professional help and those better handled through natural healing processes.

Question 41: What evidence suggests widespread research fraud?

Medical research fraud appears in various forms, from fabricated data to manipulated results. Studies have shown that when researchers are asked for their raw data, many claim it has been lost or destroyed. Drug company-funded research particularly tends to produce results favorable to the sponsor's products, regardless of actual findings.

The FDA has uncovered numerous instances of overdosing and underdosing patients, fabrication of records, and drug dumping during experimental drug trials. Even prestigious institutions and researchers have been caught falsifying research results to maintain funding or achieve desired outcomes.

Question 42: How do drug companies influence medical research?

Drug companies maintain control over research by funding most clinical trials and influencing how they're conducted and reported. They often design studies to highlight benefits while minimizing adverse effects, and they may suppress negative results entirely. Their financial influence extends to medical schools, research institutions, and individual researchers.

The companies also control most information reaching doctors about their products through advertising, sales representatives, and sponsored research. This creates a system where medical knowledge is shaped more by marketing goals than scientific truth.

Question 43: Why is medical research often unreliable?

Medical research frequently proves unreliable because of built-in biases, financial pressures, and lack of proper oversight. Researchers face intense pressure to produce positive results to maintain funding, leading to data manipulation and selective reporting of outcomes. The system rewards positive findings while discouraging negative results, even when the latter might be more important.

The peer review process often fails to catch fraudulent or poorly designed research because reviewers don't have access to raw data and may have conflicts of interest themselves. The result is a scientific literature that can't be trusted to provide accurate information about medical treatments.

Question 44: How are research results manipulated?

Results are manipulated through various methods including selective reporting of data, inappropriate statistical analysis, and outright fabrication. Researchers may choose to report only positive findings while suppressing negative ones, or they might design studies in ways that make positive results more likely.

Drug companies particularly exploit these techniques by controlling study design, data analysis, and publication of results. They may run multiple trials but only publish those showing favorable results, creating a distorted picture of their products' effectiveness and safety.

Question 45: How does Modern Medicine maintain political power?

Modern Medicine maintains power through a combination of legal authority, professional monopoly, and social control. The system uses licensing laws to restrict competition, insurance systems to control access to care, and educational requirements to maintain professional exclusivity. It also allies with government agencies to enforce its practices through law.

This power is reinforced by making health care so complex and expensive that individuals feel helpless to manage their own health. The system medicalizes social problems to extend its authority while using fear to maintain control over health decisions.

Question 46: What role do insurance companies play?

Insurance companies theoretically could reduce unnecessary medical procedures but instead reinforce the current system. They often refuse to pay for preventive care or alternative treatments while covering expensive conventional procedures. This creates financial incentives for excessive testing and treatment.

The insurance system also helps maintain medical authority by making people dependent on approved providers and treatments. It functions as a form of medical indulgences, allowing people to buy future blessings because the system admits it can't maintain their health.

Question 47: How does medical licensing control practice?

Medical licensing serves to maintain professional monopoly rather than protect public health. It restricts alternative practitioners while protecting even dangerous conventional practices. The licensing system rarely disciplines incompetent doctors but actively persecutes those who challenge orthodox methods.

The system uses licensing to enforce conformity with conventional practices and prevent innovation in healthcare delivery. This helps maintain the profession's power while limiting patient choices in healthcare.

Question 48: Why is preventive medicine often dangerous?

Preventive medicine as practiced by Modern Medicine often involves harmful interventions in healthy people. Screening programs frequently produce false positives leading to unnecessary treatments. Preventive medications like vaccines and fluoride can cause serious side effects while providing questionable benefits.

The system's approach to prevention focuses on early detection and treatment rather than true prevention through lifestyle and nutrition. This creates opportunities for harmful medical interventions in healthy people while ignoring real preventive measures.

Question 49: What makes screening programs problematic?

Screening programs often cause more harm than good through false positives, unnecessary treatments, and psychological damage. Mass screening frequently identifies "abnormalities" that would never cause problems if left alone, but once discovered, lead to harmful interventions.

These programs also create unnecessary anxiety and can stigmatize people based on test results that may be unreliable. The psychological impact of being labeled "at risk" often outweighs any potential benefit from early detection.

Question 50: What would "New Medicine" look like in practice?

New Medicine would emphasize prevention and natural healing while limiting technological intervention to truly necessary cases. Doctors would function more as health educators and "lifeguards," standing ready for emergencies but not interfering with natural processes. The focus would be on supporting health rather than fighting disease.

Healthcare would be centered in homes and communities rather than institutions, with strong family involvement in healing. Doctors would be trained in ethics and communication as well as medical science, and would work to make themselves progressively less necessary as people learn to maintain their own health.

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.