Yes, think again...

What you do not understand is that people who use those kind of arguments stand in the way of those who truly want to make constructive changes.

When serious people discuss the importance of nutrition, the effects of exposure to toxic substances in the environment, the wide-spread use of genetic engineering and synthetic food to animals in agriculture, they are seen as belonging to the same group of lunatics who put those movies on you-tube.

modern medicine has saved and prolonged the lives of numerous people from birth to octagenerians. Diseases that were once lethal can be put under good control for many years.

But, progress has its price, and no doubt that greed also plays a role in the turns the practice of medicine took over the years.

Regulation in general is complex. who, how and when should regulation be implanted. this is true for food, medications, movies and weapons.
Regulation means that the individual may pay a price in his freedom for the benefit of the entire community.
Also, there is always the risk that you will be putting the cat to guard the cream. The thought that disclosure of conflicts of interests solves the problem is indeed quite naive and extremely misleading. I for one, am very suspicious regarding studies in which the authors disclose being paid consultants of the same company which produced the study drug.

Even on the internet, some sites put an emphasis on freedom of speech and others put more emphasis on protecting the members from disinformation.
Each of those approaches has its prices and benefits.

As to the risks and benefits of modern medicine, I have a bigger and more balanced picture than you. Like you, I have mostly been harmed by certain treatments and medications. At the same time, as opposed to you, I realize that I belong to the small minority who have a paradoxical response to a medication which is very effective for many people.

The physician who gave me this medication and insisted that I keep on taking it, had a very black and white view in which all patients could only benefit from this treatment and if I "feel" that I am doing worse it is because of some fault in my character which prevents me from understanding that I am much better and near remission.

You, on the other hand, have the mirror image of that black and white view by which no patient could benefit from such treatment.

William Osler said-the more the ignorance, the more the arrogance. *edit*

The reality is that every treatment (natural or synthetic) can lead to benefit or harm, and one has to cautiously weigh one against the other in the specific patient so that the optimal management approach can be found. Physicians should not make decisions based on pamphlets given to them by drug reps. but on careful and critical reading of the pertinent medical literature.

Both your black and white approach and his black and white approach lead to harm and the exact opposite of what you want to achieve.
Physicians like him lead to people understandably lose their trust in modern medicine, and people like you lead to understandable doubts regarding other management approaches.

This, instead of combining the best of both worlds.

In this forum there have been serious, balanced and fruitful discussions regarding conventional medical interventions, avoidance of toxic substances (keeping in mind that one man's food can be another man's poison) and nutritional interventions.

Some patients here has significant improvement with very aggressive treatments , others have found various natural remedies more helpful and yet others have found the way to combine both. Myasthenia is a very complex disease, and can't be managed with a "one size fits all" approach.

I am glad that you have found what works for you.

Possibly, if you would share with us the specifics of your treatment, it may help others as well.

Telling people to stop trusting their physicians and the treatments they are given will not be helpful and may cause potential harm.