Wednesday, 18 January 2017

Transgender. Sexual Identity. Are pharmaceutical drugs playing a role in changing it?

There are lots of new illnesses and diseases plaguing us that were hitherto unknown. And many illnesses and diseases that we have known for millennia that have become more severe, and more common. I have regularly suggested that pharmaceutical drugs were one of the main reasons for this decline in health, and my ebook "DIE's - the Disease Inducing Effects of Pharmaceutical Drugs" provides the plentiful information that supports this supposition. Now, it would appear, the harm being caused by these drugs is affecting our sexual identity.

The website 'RxISK' is a free, independent drug safety website that helps weigh the benefits of pharmaceutical drugs against the potential dangers. It is an important website because it asks this important question.

               "All drugs have side effects, but people often don’t link the effect they are experiencing to starting, stopping, or changing the dose of a drug. RxISK provides free access to information and tools to help you assess the connection between a drug and a side effect."

In October 2014, RxISK published an article, "Asexuality: a curious parallel". It noted the 'explosion'  during the last two decades in the number of children being prescribed antidepressant, antipsychotic and stimulant drugs, and also the 'dramatic' increase in the number of children exposed to these drugs before they are born. It pointed out that SSRI antidepressants caused birth defects, and were implicated in causing autistic spectrum disorders. It stated that SSRIs had "a profound effect on brain chemistry after only a single dose", that patients, even after their first dose, "will be aware of some degree of reduced genital sensitivity within 30 minutes of taking the dose,  and that "If an expectant mother is taking an SSRI, so is the unborn baby". It also added that all antidepressants transfer taken by mother's also transfer to the child through her breast milk.

Indeed, the article outlines a new condition, called Post-SSRI Sexual Dysfunction (PSSD), and referred to several articles published by RxISK, and referred to a published paper that looked at 120 cases of enduring sexual dysfunction. As RxISK stated,

               "Given what we know about enduring sexual problems caused by SSRIs, it is reasonable to wonder how a prenatal or childhood exposure would affect a person’s long-term development and functioning. No studies have ever been done to investigate whether children exposed to psychotropic drugs either directly, or during pregnancy, grow up to have an unaffected sexuality."

Recently RxISK published two further articles on the issue, Asexuality, Transgender and SSRI's, published 31st October 2016, and Transgender, Asexuality and SSRIs, published 7th November 2016. They both raise the question of the link between SSRI antidepressant drugs and children with sexual identity issues. What is interesting about these articles is not so much the articles themselves, but the comments they have attracted from readers. This is testimony from individuals who have either experienced, or witnessed the sexual issues that have arisen from the pharmaceutical drugs implicated.

If the evidence of the link between SSRI drugs and sexual identity / transgender issues continues to increase, as it has done during recent years, a new issue will arise, not about the link between drugs and sexual identity, but focusing on denials by the pharmaceutical industry that any such a link exists, and the failure of the conventional medical establishment to do nothing about it.

  • We will be told that there has always been transgender children, the only difference being that now they are 'coming out'.
  • The testimony of people affected by sexual identity issues will be dismissed as 'anecdotal' and 'unscientific'.
  • The drugs industry will commission new 'scientific' studies that will discover there is no link between drugs and asexuality.
  • And, of course, the media will refuse to discuss the issue.
The latter appears to have already begun. RxISK has noted that Wikipedia (a close friend of the pharmaceutical industry, so not a website that should be considered reliable on any health issue) has taken down its PSSD page. RxISK say that they restored it, but I have not been able to find it today (18 January 2017), so that too has probably been removed. It can, however, be found here, on the RxISK website.

Incidentally, the homeopathic community has attempted to publish a reasonable article on Wikipedia for some time, without success. The owner is, apparently, stolidly anti-homeopathy. So much for its claims to be an 'encyclopedia' of information and knowledge!

So, as the evidence of a link between pharmaceutical drugs and sexual identity issues is becoming compelling, the pharmaceutical industry is engaged in a massive cover-up, alongside its friends and allies. RxISK are doing an exceptional job with this issue, and others. They are, however, pushing up against very powerful and influential forces, who power and influence depends upon their continuing and ongoing ability to sell drugs, regardless of the harm they cause to patients, or, as it would seem, even the future of the human race! 

Tuesday, 17 January 2017

The Plague of Auto-Immune Disease

The functioning of our immune system is complex, and most descriptions of how it functions are usually difficult for the layman or non-medic to understand. I include myself in that! However, there are five things we should all know and understand about our immune system.
  • Our health and well-being depends on our immune system working efficiently and well. It is what keeps us healthy, and allows us to fight off infection and disease.
  • Increasingly it is not doing so. Auto-immune disease, that is diseases caused by our immune system turning against us, are rapidly expanding in number and increasing in incidence.
  • Conventional medicine usually tells us that the reason for the explosion of auto-immune diseases is 'ideopathic' - that is, the causes are 'spontaneous', or unknown.
  • Pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are known to adversely effect the functioning of our immune system, and although rarely admitted, can often be the cause of auto-immune diseases.
  • Immunotherpy is a conventional treatment of many conditions and diseases. It does so by 'inducing', 'enhancing', or 'suppressing' the body's immune response. In other words, conventional medicine actually seeks to interfere with the immune system.
In seeking to interfere with the immune system, conventional medicine is the only medical therapy to do so. In traditional or alternative medicine, in all its many forms, there is a recognition that the body will stay healthy, or will regain health, only through the its own healing mechanism, that is, through the immune system. For this reason, they all seek to support the immune system, not to change it in any way, and certainly not to outguess, to out-think or manipulate it in any way.

Autoimmune Disease
Many people will suffer from auto-immune disease without knowing it is an auto-immune disease! It can affect almost any part of the body, including the heart, brain, nerves, muscles, skin, eyes, joints, lungs, kidneys, glands, the digestive tract, and blood vessels. The sheer number of diseases that are now known to fall into this category has now reached over 100, is this number is rising, year on year! For a comprehensive list of this diseases, go to Auto-immune Disease List website. Just a few of the most common ones below demonstrates how important they are, and how much they are increasing.
  • Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis
  • Addison's disease
  • Alopecia Areata
  • Ankylosing spondylitis
  • Autoimmune hepatitis
  • Autoimmune inner ear disease
  • Bullous pemphigoid
  • Coeliac disease
  • Chagas disease
  • Dermatomyositis
  • Diabetes (Type 1)
  • Endometriosis
  • Goodpasture's syndrome
  • Graves Disease
  • Guillain-Barre syndrome
  • Hashimoto's thyroiditis
  • Hidradenitis suppurativa
  • Interstitial cystitis
  • Lupus
  • Morphea
  • Multiple sclerosis
  • Myasthenia gravis
  • Narcolepsy
  • Necrotizing Fascitis
  • Neuromyotonia
  • Pemphigus Vulgaris
  • Pernicious anaemia
  • Polymyositis
  • Prader-Willi Syndrome
  • Primary biliary cirrhosis
  • Psoriasis
  • Retts Syndrome
  • Rheumatoid arthritis
  • Schizophrenia
  • Scleroderma
  • Sj√∂gren's syndrome
  • Temporal arteritis ('giant cell arteritis')
  • Vasculitis
  • Vitiligo
  • Wegener's granulomatosis
The Cause of Autoimmune Disease
Conventional medicine tells us that the reason for the explosion of auto-immune diseases is 'ideopathic'. In other words, its causes are 'spontaneous', or unknown. This HealthLine website is fairly typical of what conventional medicine tells us. It says that autoimmune disease may be caused by bacteria, or viruses, or by chemical and environmental irritants, or by drugs. But it is the explanation of autoimmune disease that is typically cited as the cause.

               "An autoimmune disease develops when your immune system, which defends your body against disease, decides your healthy cells are foreign. As a result, your immune system attacks healthy cells. Depending on the type, an autoimmune disease can affect one or many different types of body tissue. It can also cause abnormal organ growth and changes in organ function."

As a description this is adequate, but as an explanation of the causes of autoimmune disease it is not. The cause is about why our immune system makes this elemental mistake? Why is it attacking healthy cells? 

Any research on conventional medical websites, such as NHS Choices, will demonstrate that there is an acceptance that the cause of autoimmune disease is 'unknown'. Many forms called 'idiopathic', which now link automaticallywith the description 'iatrogenic'!

They are doctor-induced, that is, they are caused by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. Many of the diseases were unknown before the 'Age of Drugs' that began around of middle of the mid-20th century. The rise of these diseases has mirrored the rise in our consumption of prescription drugs.

Pharmaceutical Drugs and the Immune System
Yet it is well known that pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines adversely effect the functioning of our immune system. Conventional doctors know this, although they rarely admit it, or warn us before prescribing them. Certain drugs are known to cause autoimmune disease through knowledge of their 'side effects.
  • Antibiotics. Many autoimmune diseases, like allergies, psoriasis, irritable bowl, et al., are known to start in the gut, where the bacteria residing there are needed to undertake important functions in digesting food. They have been compromised, targeted by antibiotics, whose task is to kill bacteria, good and bad, useful and necessary, and usually do so quite indescriminently.
  • Vaccines. Vaccines, of all kinds, introduce toxins that are known to destroy the functioning of the immune system. This is achieved by injecting poisonous substances, like embalming fluid, and toxic heavy metals like mercury or aluminium, into the muscle tissue, whilst at the same time introducing genetically modified bacteria, live viruses, chicken embryos and aborted fetal proteins into the body! Scientists have known about the connection between autoimmune diseases and vaccination for many years. In the February 2000 issue of the magazine Autoimmunity, ten research articles evaluated the causal link between vaccinations and autoimmune disease.
  • Other Drugs. There are several specific pharmaceutical drugs that are known to upset the immune system. These include Alferon N, Inerferon Alfa, Infergen, Intron A, PegIntron, Roferon-A. Yet it is likely that most pharmaceutical drugs can cause autoimmune disease, and to discover which ones are responsible it is probably better to look at the specific autoimmune condition involved.
  • Other causes. There are many other factors known to compromise our immune system, including a diet high in sugar, fluoride in our water supply, and pesticides in our food.
Maybe these drugs and vaccines affect our immune system by accident rather than design, they are the 'unintended consequence', they cause 'collateral damage' to patients when doctors are treating other conditions! Perhaps they are a 'side effect', in the way conventional medicine always uses that rather ineffectual and inadequate term! But the failure of conventional medicine to diagnose the problem leads to even more problems.

The conventional medical establishment knowingly, willingly, intentionally targets the immune system in order to combat autoimmune disease. Immunotherapy treats cancer, through drugs that attempt to 'stimulate' the immune system to destroy tumours. Immuno-suppressive drugs are used following organ transplants, and to treat a variety of autoimmune diseases. Immunotherapy is used to treat allergies by seeking to 'reduce the sensitivity' of the immune system to allergens.

Immunotherapy is used mainly to reduce or suppress the immune response. The reason for doing so is that the immune system is seen to be attacking the body, in one way or another. Unfortunately conventional medicine does not ask 'why' the immune system is doing so? Indeed, it usually says it does not know why! It is deemed good enough that they have observed that the immune system is not working correctly, so it needs to be suppressed!

Immunotherapy drugs are an attempt to treat illnesses and diseases that have been caused by a faulty immune system - to stop the development of cancerous cells, to respond to allergens that an already compromised immune system is failing to recognise, to replace organs that no longer function properly, usually after many years of treatment with pharmaceutical drugs.

Yet the suppression of the immune system by powerful drugs absolutely fails to address the root cause, which is a faulty immune system! It is a strategy akin to taking a painkiller because of a painful foot after we have stood on a nail that is penetrating in it. Logically, the first thing to do is to remove the nail, not to prescribe painkillers! The first reaction to autoimmune disease, and a faulty immune system, is not to suppress it, but to find out why it is not working properly!

Conventional medicine has many pharmaceutical drugs that are specifically designed to suppress the immune system, including azathioprine, chlorambucil, cyclophosphamide, cyclosporine, mycophenolate, methotrexate and many others. Corticosteroids, such as prednisone, are immunosuppressants drugs, used to relieve inflammatory illnesses, but which, when taken over a long period, have many serious side effects. They all seek to undermine the body's ability to defend itself against foreign substances and microorganisms. As a result they increase the risk of serious infections and cancer.

So, pharmaceutical drugs are not only a cause of autoimmune diseases, but faced with them, conventional medicine introduces more pharmaceutical drugs to treat them! This demonstrates that conventional medicine is not just an ineffective medical system, but one that actually creates disease, and then profits from the new disease by introducing more drugs!

Vaccination is immunotherapy too, this time by introducing infectious agents to artificially activate the immune system. In this sense, vaccines are used by a medical system that has no confidence in the immune system to cope with the rigours of staying healthy, of protecting itself from infectious disease, without the direct intervention of doctors, who (of course) know better is needed than our own bodies!

There are many non-medical ways of boosting our immunity, and supporting our immune system. They include regular exercise, exposure to sunlight, vitamin D supplements, and a good diet, rich in herbs and spices, reducing stress, and getting plenty of rest and good sleep.

But perhaps the best way of supporting our immune system is to avoid conventional medicine, and pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. If you are already on conventional medication, insist that your doctor works with you to get you off them. Then seek a homeopath, or a naturopath, or some other traditional therapist, to support your immune system.

To keep yourself regularly informed about the failings of the conventional medial system, and to search for safer, more effective medical treatment, click on 'follow this blog' to the right of this blog. This will notify you whenever new blogs are published.

Friday, 13 January 2017

NHS in Crisis (2017)

The British NHS is in constant crisis.
  • It is consistently unable to cope with the demand for health services. 
  • It is continually asking for more money.
  • Governments always gives in, and gives them more money.
  • But any new money is spent quickly, with no apparent improvement it its ability to cope with demand.
I have looked back at my previous blogs, and I have regularly discussed this ongoing problem. "Health Spending brings down Governments, and bankrupts the Nation" was written in 2012, and outlines the long history from 1947 to 2010 of how successive governments have been increasing expenditure on the NHS - but never enough to enable it to cope. Since then, I have been commenting on the the regular NHS crisis, see these blogs, although there are others!

The NHS Debate (The NHS in Crisis 2011) published in May 2011
Our doctors in crisis (NHS in Crisis 2015) published in March 2015.
Britain's NHS in crisis (2016) published in February 2016.
NHS in Crisis (2016) published in March 2016.

Yet the reason for this monotonous repeated failure has never been ascertained. 

The media never ask the right questions, questions that would be asked if the issue concerned any other sphere of human activity. Instead, they are happy to discuss the problem in accordance with the agenda set by the conventional medical establishment, the excuses, the self-justifications. Journalists never challenge that agenda, they invariably go along with it.
  • The NHS is inadequately resourced.
  • The NHS needs to be restructured, re-organised.
  • The patient population is ageing, and this is why there is increased demand.
  • More sick patients, with more and more illnesses, are being treated every year.
The problem is non of these things. The problem with the NHS is not financial, it is not organisational, IT IS MEDICAL!
  • Conventional medicine does not work. It is not effective. It rarely, if ever, has successful or effective treatments available that actually cure sick people. They ameliorate, they provide temporary fixes. But patients are seldom completely well again.
  • Indeed, the pharmaceutical drugs that form the basis of conventional medical treatment make patients sicker. Doctors call them 'side effects'. They are really 'disease-inducing-effects', in other words, they actually cause disease. More disease, that is, for the NHS to treat! More cost. More work. More pressure.
  • When conventional medicine tries to prevent disease (often benign illnesses) its main weapon is vaccines. And vaccines also cause disease, especially to children, who then become long-term NHS patients, with long-term needs, long-term sickness, such as ADHD, Autism, Asthma, and many others. More disease for the NHS to treat. More cost for the NHS. More work and pressure for staff.
  • These doctor-induced (iatrogenic) diseases are now running at epidemic levels. And conventional medicine has no effective treatment for these illnesses, most of them, at least in part, caused by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. These epidemic diseases are at the heart of the ongoing NHS crisis, and they always have been.
The government will almost certainly provide the NHS with more resources, given sufficient pressure from doctors and patients, from patient support groups, supported (in the background) by the pharmaceutical industry, and unchallenged by the mainstream media, by politicians, and by governments, who ask no questions, and fail to challenge the conventional medical establishment about its failure to cope.

So what good will this new funding do? There will be more money for largely ineffective treatments that will fail to reduce the sick population and so fail to reduce workload. There will be more more money to spend on more pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines which, through their 'side effects', will increase levels of sickness and disease, adding to the future workload of the NHS. And with increased demand on NHS resources, there will be another funding crisis.

And this will continue until proper, pertinent, challenging questions are asked of the conventional medical establishment about the performance they are achieving from the money they are already spending, and the outcome of this expenditure on patient outcomes.

To keep yourself regularly informed about the failings of the conventional medial system, and to search for safer, more effective medical treatment, click on 'follow this blog' to the right of this blog. This will notify you whenever new blogs are published.

Monday, 9 January 2017

Autism and the Amish community

Is Autism caused by vaccines? The conventional medical establishment has been denying the link vehemently for many decades, not least during the last 10 years. Yet the debate continues, whilst the autism epidemic rises. Only 60-70 years ago, before vaccines were introduced, autism was virtually unknown!

So, perhaps I can make a suggestion to medical scientists. Do one of you randomised control tests (RCT's)! Select a group of people who refuse to have their children vaccinated, and another group who want their children to be vaccinated. Do everything you need to do to 'match' the two groups. Then compare the outcome. How many refusers children develop Autism? How many vaccinated children develop Autism? And then accept the evidence! It should be conclusive, one way or the other. The mystery of the emergence of this new disease will have been resolved!

The problem is that the outcome is already known, the study has already been conducted. In the USA, where most children are vaccinated, about 1 in 50 can now be expected to become autistic. But the Amish community has always refused vaccination. They form are close community of people who remain 'vaccine free'.

And the result of this 'informal' study is, indeed, conclusive. There is no autism within the Amish community. This Natural News article reminded me about the Amish community, and their autism free children. It stated this.

               "Take a little trip to the heart of Pennsylvania Dutch country and try to tag yourself even half a dozen Amish children with autism and you’ll come up short. If statistics matched our national average, there would be about 200 in the Amish community, but to date, there are only three, one of which was adopted and brought over from China...... Another one actually did get vaccinated and developed autism shortly afterwards."

The conventional medical establishment will never allow any such experiment! They will deny the evidence provided to us by the Amish community. They will refuse to replicate this evidence in a properly constructed RCT trial, even though they claim that their medicine is 'scientific' because of the evidence such trials provide. Actually, they only want evidence that supports their drugs and vaccines, not evidence that informs us that they cause illness and disease.

The Natural News always gives another statistic - that children who receive mercury-containing vaccinations (thimerosal) are 27 times more likely to develop autism than unvaccinated children. The statistic comes from a recent study based on the data provided by the CDC (the 'American Centres for Disease Control and Prevention')!

Anyone thinking of having a vaccination, any parent thinking of vaccinating their child, should consider this information. 

They should also read this article on Autism published by TruthWiki, and new internet encyclopaedia, like Wikipedia, but without the ties to conventional medicine, and the pharmaceutical industry!

And in case you are wondering whether Autism is the only disease generated by vaccination, note that the Natural Health article also informs us that the Amish community is also virtually free of cancer and heart disease too!

Thursday, 5 January 2017

Flu Vaccine. Consternation within the NHS

There are three important factors about health care for patients - and only three!
  • Effectiveness, we want to get better...
  • Safety, we don't want the treatment to harm us...
  • Cost, treatment should not be expensive, it should not threaten to bankrupt the NHS...

The flu vaccine prevents us from getting flu. That, at least, is what we are told by the conventional medical establishment. They tell us that the treatment is effective, safe, and it is not exorbitantly expensive.

So, with this belief, the NHS tries every year to persuade us to be vaccinated, apparently without significant success. The GP magazine, Pulse, has reported that "Extra GP phone calls and messages failed to boost flu vaccine uptake". According to Pulse, a GP surgery in east London targeted patients in three key 'at-risk' groups, older people over-65, COPD patients, and patients with diabetes. They did so "in a bid to boost vaccine uptake and improve their QOF achievement scores". So in December (2016) the practice contacted patients in these groups by text messages, emails and telephone calls to home and mobile phones.

Pulse says that GP practices are under increasing pressure from NHS England to boost flu vaccine uptake. Coverage in 2015 fell, and with children and younger people, uptake has fallen for the previous three years.

Another pressure, not mentioned in the article, but in a comment from a GP, is that doctors are paid for every patient they vaccinate.

The campaign was a failure. Pulse reported that the proportion of patients vaccinated went up 5% with diabetes patients, 3% with COPD patients, and actually declined by 1% with older patients. The team concluded:

               "This study shows that attempts to intensify patient notification ..... had no significant impact on improving QOF flu vaccine uptake targets... The two main reasons for this appear to be difficulty in contacting patients and a general lack of interest in getting the flu vaccine among the contacted population despite convenient and accessible flu clinics being organised."

Pulse says that this was put down mainly "to misconceptions about the vaccine - that it is unnecessary and causes a range of adverse side effects - as well as health and mobility problems that prevented patients from coming in".

Or is the growing resistance to the flu vaccine, and vaccines generally, a growing awareness that they are ineffective, unsafe, and not cost effective? As one doctor comments:

               "Can we just remind everyone that there is no evidence anywhere from any country in any year that mass inoculation population flu vaccination of anyone over 5yrs of age has any effect on anything other than politician's ego and pharmaceutical's profits. It's non evidence based medicine and should be shunned."

So perhaps patient resistance has less to do with 'misconceptions', and more to do with effectiveness and patient harm. Certainly this blog has gone over both these issues. I will not rehearse them here, again, but here are just a few of the links to articles I have previously written.

          Flu Vaccine. Is it worth the serious risks involved?
          Preventing Colds and Flu's this winter
          The Flu Vaccine
          The Flu Vaccine that causes Narcolepsy? Pandemrix
          Avian flu, a new epidemic. What can conventional medicine do?
          Alzheimer's disease and the flu vaccine

There are others, all pointing to the ineffectiveness and dangers of the flu vaccine; they can be found by searching within the blog-site. Yet perhaps the most interesting feature of this season's flu vaccination campaign can be seen in what is happening within our hospitals. Last night I watched my local news bulletin on the BBC. This was dominated by the warning that our hospitals were under immense 'winter' pressures. The hospitals at Leicester, Milton Keynes, Northampton and Kettering were all operating under a 'black alert', meaning that they were operating at 100% capacity. One of the reasons given was the number of people visiting hospital with flu-symptoms!

Now, who are these people with flu symptoms? Are they the patients who have not had their flu vaccination? Or are they the people who have had their flu vaccination? The question needs to be asked, although I suspect there will be no answer. And there will be no answer because a large number of these flu victims will be those who have had their flu vaccination!

So we spend money on vaccinations, only for our hospitals to be placed on black alert! Conventional medicine does not treat illness successfully. It actually creates illness. They it cannot cope. Then it demands even more resources, to spend on drugs and vaccines that don't work, and increase levels of sickness. It has long been so.

This is not what the conventional medical establishment wants us to hear! That many people who have had the flu vaccine are getting flu, or something similar. But it happens regularly, children are vaccinated against measles, and they are amongst the population who contract measles. Children are vaccinated against mumps, and they are amongst the population who contract mumps. It is part of the growing evidence that unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated children. The scientific journal that originally published the results withdrew the study from publication. This has been reported in several websites, including the Waking Times.

               "The abstract of the study was published online in Frontiers in Public Health after being accepted November 2 (2016). The study compared children’s health via surveys of mothers who home-schooled their children aged 6-12 years. Nearly 40 percent of the children had never been vaccinated, so the control group was adequate to do a good comparison against children who had been vaccinated. After heavy criticism from the public and scientific community due to the results of the study.... it was retracted. Why? Those that were vaccinated were three times more likely to be diagnosed with neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism."

So, is the poor uptake of the flu vaccine the result of patient 'misconceptions'? (And why is it that the conventional medical establishment always blames the patient for ill-health?) Or is it because patients are now more aware of the ineffectiveness, and the dangers of the flu vaccination, and they are making a personal, reasoned choice.

If the NHS were really interested in reducing flu, this winter or any winter, it would look to more effective, and safer treatments for flu. This is what everyone needs to do, and the conventional health system fails rapidly. Look at this website to compare the conventional treatment of flu with homeopathic treatment.

Homeopathy offers everything the patient needs. Safety. Effectiveness. And minimum expense.

Monday, 19 December 2016

Avian flu, a new epidemic. What can conventional medicine do?

There is another epidemic of bird flu ravaging Europe, found in 14 countries, and it has now reached England. It has been found on a farm in Lincolnshire, and confirmed by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). They say that more than 5,000 turkeys at the farm have been diagnosed with the H5N8 strain of avian flu. Last week, Defra instructed owners to keep their birds indoors for 30 days to protect them from this highly-infectious strain of flu.

Urgent measures are being taken. There are investigations beginning to establish the source of the outbreak. Farmers have received their instructions to protect their flocks, and been put on alert. A six mile surveillance area has been established, and bio-security measures have been stepped up. The public has been reassured that the danger to them is limited, and that poultry supplies should not be affected. Similar actions are being taken in Scotland. Sheila Voas, Scotland;s Chief Veterinary Officer has said"

               "The Scottish government declared this zone as a precaution against disease, although we knew that there was always a risk of the virus arriving in the UK with migratory wild birds. The fact that H5N8 has been detected in housed turkeys highlights the importance of biosecurity. We know that H5N8 is circulating in wild birds, and simply moving your birds indoors may not be enough to protect them if your biosecurity is not sufficient. Businesses should also review their contingency plans in case of an outbreak."

So there is great concern. But what happens to the infected birds? What happens to the livelihood of poultry farmers? Does conventional medicine have any treatment for avian flu?

Apparently not. It would seem that many of the birds died of the flu, and the rest of the flock are due to be culled! Conventional vets have nothing more to offer!

And they call this medicine! Flu can certainly be a serious disease, and for birds, especially those kept indoors, in cramped and unnatural conditions, it can most certainly be a killer. But culling a flock because of an outbreak of flu? Is there nothing better than conventional medicine can offer?

If not, perhaps they should take some advice from homeopathy. I have written about the treatment of influenza on my 'Why Homeopathy?' website, which compares conventional and homeopathic treatments of flu. Homeopathy is a simple and straight forward method, and easily adapted to birds, even large flocks of birds, both in the prevention and treatment of flu.

My preferred remedy is Oscillococcinum, a brand name for a remedy more commonly known as Anas Barb. For any farmer interested, these are available from any homeopathic pharmacy. I use these remedies regularly every Autumn and Winter for myself and my family. The remedy Influenzinum-Bacillinum is an alternative. They can be given to birds via their water supply.

In fact, I think I will now pop outside and pop a couple of Oscillococcinum tablets into my two bird baths!

I would not like to think that conventional vets will cull my lovely robins, blackbirds, blue tits, et al, because they were sneezing!

Big Pharma profits at our expense

No, I am no repeating myself. Pulse, the GP magazine, has today revealed yet another case of Big Pharma profiteering. I won't spend too much time on it! It has become such a regular occurrence, and the last time I blogged about it was just 3 days ago!

This time, Actavis UK hiked the price of a ‘lifesaving’ hydrocortisone drug by over 12,000%, according to the UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) on 18th December 2016.  The drug, which I believed is called Zenoxone, used to treat eczema, dermatitis and insect bite reactions, cost 70p in April 2008, and £88 by March 2016.

Pulse also tried to estimate the cost to NHS which spent £522,000 a year on hydrocortisone tablets in 2008, £70 million by 2016.

Teva, another drug company that acquired Actavis in August 2016, said that it "intended to ‘defend’ themselves". Drug companies are good at denial. They deny that they are profiteering. The deny that their drugs cause harm to patients.

Meanwhile, the CMA has to be careful. Once again they have challenged the pharmaceutical industry, and must fear that they will trigger legal action from an excessively wealthy industry. So their findings, they say, are only ‘provisional’, and ‘no conclusion' should be drawn yet. Is one possible conclusion that the pharmaceutical industry is riven with fraud and corruption!

I have looked to see if there is any reaction from the NHS. What monitoring of drug prices do the NHS have in place to protect themselves (and the taxpayer) from this kind of situation? What is their response to being fleeced by drug companies? After all, the customer for these drugs is the NHS, who decide whether for pay for them, and how much taxpayer's money to pay for them.

It would be nice to think that the NHS had something to say!