|The law of the jungle in conventional medicine|
There are no translations available.
The law of the jungle is still widely accepted in conventional medicine of today.
The alternative therapies provide the non-violent non-aggressive solution in therapeutics.
Will health authorities take advantage of such offer?
In the same way that our contemporary societies practice or tolerate the law of the jungle in our social and military dealings in the same manner the same societies tolerate the same law in conventional medicine.
Whether we like it or not conventional medicine implements the law of the strongest, the law of the jungle when tries to kill the bacteria by stronger and stronger drugs that have at the same time side effects by killing useful bacteria or damaging useful functions of the organism.
Here is the logic of this assumption:
The law that exists in the natural world is expressed as the 'right of the strongest' or the 'law of the jungle' as it is more picturesquely expressed.
If we abandon a garden in which we cultivated useful fruit trees, we observe this 'law' in action; within a few years these evolved species of trees become weak and eventually die, and their place is taken by wild plants and trees. Nature is not interested in ennobling species, in evolving them, or making them more useful for humans. On the contrary, according to the second law of thermodynamics nature is always tending to entropy, bringing about a chaotic situation, inertia and the lowest state of consciousness.
Human society, on the other hand, has since long decided to go against this 'law of nature', and establish the moral law where the 'right' the 'useful' and the 'just' should prevail according to human values. Help for the weak and the needy, support of one another, individual freedom, respect for each other and respect of human laws were deemed to be the correct decisions for humans. All this effort was the result of painful human experience throughout history, precisely in order not to allow the 'law of the jungle' to prevail upon humanity.
All these ideas were established not only in order to make possible the survival of the human race, but also to give the possibility for evolution and spiritual development. Humans are the only living creatures in the world that have the possibility of choosing either to create or to destroy. Technological advancement should have been therefore the means of helping the evolution of humans, and not become the means of their destruction as we see today happening in the world.
Humans have the possibility to destroy the human race to annihilate it from the face of the earth.
It is therefore obvious that as long as moral laws are not applied, the world will not move towards evolution and the creation of a 'new human being with higher conscience' but on the contrary will go on a chaotic and morally degrading process where the law of the jungle will finally prevail and the destruction of the human race will be guaranteed.
Countless wise individuals throughout history have resisted this law of the jungle in trying to uplift human conscience and make societies realize the dangers of such mentality and methodologies.
Apart from the ammunitions of mass destruction in which we may witness the catastrophic effect of the law of the jungle in action, the second worse application of this law we witness in conventional medicine through the use of chemical drugs.
The question is : is it correct to think that one of the main source of destruction of the human race is the unwise use of chemical drugs? if the answer is yes then we have to see what it can be done in order to detract from this wrong course of action.
The practice of conventional therapeutics which involves the throwing of a 'bomb' in the form of an antibiotic, or an antifungal or hormonal or chemotherapeutic drug in to the human body has been proven to be dangerous and it has been established through countless research papers that it has dire long term consequences for the human organism who receives such a bomb.
If we all agree that we have a major problem for humanity, where the use of aggressive drugs has ended up in degenerating the human organism then we have to see if we can find more peaceful, non violent methods for treating the human diseases
In our ranks all the sane individuals-practitioners of homeopathy know that such a methodology exists but they also know that we cannot transform the conventional structure of medicine suddenly or overnight without proper preparation for the transition. We also know that conventional aggressive drugs are in some instances necessary to reduce the suffering especially in the end stages of chronic diseases.
It is therefore our duty to show to the world through countless articles and research the proof of the degeneration of the human organism through the use of chemical substances and to bring up to the awareness of the people the possibility of better ways, non violent of treating diseases.
The success lies in showing to the medical authorities - who so far have refused to look at the facts - that there is an alternative and that this alternative is effective and useful.
We need the co-operation of the existing medical structure in order to show to them and to ourselves where are the limits of the different alternatives like homeopathy acupuncture and osteopathy.
There are statistics that show that people are resorting by millions to such alternative methods and they are satisfied in contrast to conventional medicine, but there seems to be no reaction, no signals of perception from the medical authorities or from the health ministries.
What is the reason? Inertia? Self interest? Fear of loosing positions of authority? Insecurity? Inferiority complex? Resistance from pharmaceutical industry? May be all of these parameters together? The certainty is that the alternative in spite of offering so far extremely useful services to humanity still remains on the fringe and away from conventional medical schools.The exception comes in Europe from the latest effort of the Italian Government to implement relevant laws and officially accepting the alternatives.
But if the alternative has been able to provide such substantial services to the diseased humanity so far, without having really good educational facilities or structures then it is about time that the health authorities take some drastic action to implement the alternative on a more official and controlled educational programs that will provide the maximum benefit of these alternatives to humanity.