hi,

worth the time and effort to view.
mark hymen m.d. knows his stuff.
a white coat writes a script he would not give his dog to eat and you blindly dump it into your body.............?
i think not.

it is all toxic poison that is slowly killing your liver and cures nothing.
watch them all and get your heads fully wrapped around this.
cheers,
s
..........................................

start here.
here is the intro. to his u tube channel.
he also had auto immune .
*edit*
he is what medicine should be in north america.
sadly, the pill pushers are still the status quo.

a few more choice vids.
milk
*edit*
the FDA and big pharma exposed.
*edit*
200 more vids in his channel on u tube.
...............................................
you are all being sold down the river by the white coats and big pharma.
i have full blown MG and am slowly getting the toxins out and regaining my health.
change your lifestyle.
stop eating processed garbage in a box or a can.
you can get better without the meds. and i am walking proof that it worxs.

Mmmm... yeah.

While there is nothing wrong with eating better, (and we all can eat better) just eating better will not cure what ails most of us. Dr. Hymen is selling something too.

Did you know that there is a community in the Himalayan mountains that has never seen cancer? .... nobody lives to more than 30, but they don't have cancer there.

I don't think it is very fair of you to try to sell this snake oil to people who are willing to grasp at anything. Just my opinion of Dr. Hymen's pitch... if it works for you, great.

i am not selling anything.

To tell sick people to stop taking all drugs is selling something.
It is selling a philosophy. One that can be hazardous.
Some of us will die without drugs.
If the MG doesn't get me, the hypertension will. No drugs. No me.

Like everything, this requires a balanced approach.

Diseases are the combined result of genetics and environmental exposure.

Our genetic work-up dictates the way in which our body will respond to certain nutritional deficiencies and certain substances in our environment.

Many times it is a multi-step process in which a certain gene leads to the way we respond to a certain substance. this in turn leads to minor changes we are not even aware of. Those changes now make us more susceptible to a certain substance that didn't harm us before. This in turn can lead to mutations in other genes, which now make us more vulnerable to numerous other substances.

The disease manifests itself clinically only after the body's own repair mechanisms become overwhelmed by those gradual changes.

At that stage we can't repair it just by changing our nutrition or other environmental exposures. This is where pharmacological agents and other medical interventions have a role.

Yet, if we only use pharmacological agents without changing our environment, the same process is likely to occur again.

Also, occasionally correcting the nutritional deficiencies and environmental exposure (if one is able to figure out what they are among the numerous substances we are exposed to every day) may lead to a gradual reversal of the pathological process.

A good example is celiac disease. Once gluten is eliminated from the diet most people will become healthy within a relatively short period.

But, not everyone is gluten sensitive. There are numerous other substances we are exposed to on a daily basis.
The modern world created an enormous amount of neurotoxic and carcinogenic substances which are added to our foods, soaps and cleaning detergents in "safe amounts".
But, what are "safe amounts"? what may be safe for one person can cause significant harm to another because of his/her genetic build-up.

The enormous advances in modern medicine over the last century have given many (physicians and patients) the illusion of "happiness in a bottle".
The message was- eat what you want, live as you want, if you take a certain pill you will be fine.

Yes, physicians did advocate a "healthy life style" but they did very little to find out what this life-style should be for their specific patient.
Very little time in medical school is dedicated to understanding nutrition or to learn what kind of toxic substances are abundant in our environment.

In fact medical students learn that they should be very contemplate about such environmental exposures. They are immersed in formaldehyde in anatomy class. They work with numerous toxic substances in the lab. and they are ridiculed if they show any concern. They are allowed to smoke. The are encouraged to skip meals. They are exposed to sleep deprivation on a regular basis etc etc.

So, the message that is conveyed to them is- If you can endure this, so can your patients.

Modern society is quite happy with the kind of training that future physicians are getting. Very little changes have occurred over the years.

Patients are being blamed for not living a "healthy life-style" when no one ever prescribed one for them. "Exercise more and eat a healthy balanced diet". is the mantra physicians are taught to say. A "one size fits all" approach they would never use in the medications they prescribe.

Red meat is essential for some people and less so for others, Exercise is beneficial for some people and harmful for others, detergents in soap and cleaning material may be well-tolerated by some but lead to serious consequences in others etc. etc.

The need for proper individualized activity and nutrition was well recognized by ancient Greek physicians, but completely abandoned in modern medicine.

Patients are treated according to their diseases and not according to who they are. A patient that had a heart attack should stop eating red meat, take statins and exercise more. And what if this patient requires red meat, what if he/she is sensitive to statins, what if he/she belong to those people who do not benefit from exercise?
Then the patient is being blamed for being "non-compliant" and refusing to live a "healthy life style". Or that he/she has "depression", "anxiety" etc.

I think patients should follow the medical advice of their physicians, should take their medications, but they should also insist on what they know is right for them. They should ideally have an on-going dialogue with their physician so that together they can find the optimal approach.

Or else more and more people will feel in the way described in this poem, and more and more quacks will be able to fill this growing gap.

BTW,

As far as I could see Dr. Hyman http://drhyman.com/ is not advocating to abandon conventional pharmacological treatment, but like Terry Wahls http://www.terrywahls.com/ and many other physicians he thinks we should combine this treatment with life-style and nutrition changes to promote healing.

the Gestapo Nazi FDA police.

War on Health - Gary Null's documentary exposing the FDA

search it out on youtube.

still dumping that fda double blind placebo manipulated results poison in your arm..........?

think again.

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.