There Is a Natural Treatment for Infections
Chiropractic Perspectives on Infectious Diseases: General Concepts:
-
Germ Theory
Most people have an unconscious attitude toward «germs» and their relationship with humans. This sometimes borders on an irrational «phobia» or fear of all microbes. This kind of fear is unnecessary, since most germs are «harmless» to us, and It's really impossible to avoid germs—they're inside us, in and around us in large numbers, all the time. For example, it is estimated that the total number of bacteria inhabiting the midgut of a healthy person exceeds the total number of cells in a person’s body! Many of these organisms are even beneficial, if not vital, to our well-being. Even those that are not in our immediate personal space play a necessary role in nature—they are the original «recyclers.» If it weren’t for the action of bacteria on organic waste, «the food chain»—this cycle that provides the basis for sustaining life—would have ceased long ago. Essentially, life as we know it would not exist.
This attitude toward germs dates back to the 19th century, when infectious diseases were a very serious problem, as were hygiene, sanitation, and nutrition—factors now known to have contributed to the situation.
When the famous Louis Pasteur announced that he had isolated a microbe, he presented a hypothesis regarding the cause of a disease in silkworms; the idea that germs could also cause disease in humans soon followed. The Germ Theory of Disease, as it has come to be called, It has become the foundation of much of modern medicine for the treatment of diseases. In the process, advances in food preservation, agriculture, wastewater disposal, and general hygiene and sanitation practices have been virtually ignored, even though these factors deserve at least as much credit as the drugs developed to combat germs. Natural treatment of infections
It's not a matter of germs
In light of this, the «stance» of chiropractic is not to deny that germs exist, or that they have nothing to do with human diseases. Nor do chiropractors insist that if one receives regular chiropractic care, infection is impossible, or that people with infections are «cured» by chiropractic adjustments. Simply put, the chiropractic view is that germs alone do not cause infectious diseases (Natural Treatment of Infections). They can be considered «necessary for” a given infection, rather than the cause of the infection. This is not a radical or unscientific position.
In chiropractic, we emphasize that human resistance is the key factor in infectious diseases.
When we get sick because of a microbe, It is because we are unable to successfully adapt to its presence, not because the germ is present, or that it has «attacked» us. It is the evolution of our resistance that makes us susceptible to infection at certain times and not at others, in some people but not in others. If germs were the sole cause of infectious diseases, then no one would be safe during epidemics, and, as B. J. Palmer says, no one would be alive if the germ theory were believed.
The All-Powerful Nervous System
Chiropractic theory holds that the nervous system is the ultimate regulator of the human immune system, as it controls the entire body. Furthermore, it is believed that disruption of the nervous system caused by complex subluxations leads to a decrease in the body’s ability to respond as effectively as possible to the presence of microbes, and may therefore weaken the body’s resistance, making it more susceptible to infection (Natural Treatments for Infections). This is sometimes referred to as the neurodystrophy hypothesis.
Chiropractors are also aware that many other factors influence human resilience, including nutritional status, emotional stress, genetic factors, personal hygiene, and public health practices. These factors cannot be ignored by chiropractors or other health professionals.
Prevention is better than cure
Therefore, chiropractors prefer to emphasize that preventing infection is, in the long run, much more practical than treating it after it has occurred. This is true in the case of human diseases. Chiropractors use interventions that improve or boost resistance, allowing the body to restore and maintain stability by drawing on its own resources. Rather than treating people once they become ill, it seems logical that all health professionals should be primarily interested in keeping them from getting sick in the first place.
Chiropractors tend to criticize the overuse and misuse of these substances, such as antibiotics, mainly because they have often been prescribed for viral infections, in which they may have no beneficial effects. This practice has led to an increase in bacterial resistance to antibiotics; many strains are now difficult to treat with virtually any antibiotic. The practice of inappropriate antibiotic use has also contributed to a common belief among patients that they and their children cannot be cured without antibiotics or other medications. Furthermore, it has been suggested that chronic and/or inappropriate use of antibiotics causes other health problems, such as recurrent otitis media, diarrhea, yeast infections, and childhood asthma.
When allopathic medicine attempts to prevent infection, its efforts do not address all the factors that influence human resistance; instead, they focus on the area immunized by «artificial» means» -the use of vaccines and inoculation.
The chiropractic profession generally does not condemn the intent or theory behind immunization through vaccination. Rather, it is critical of placing complete trust in this practice, especially in light of its shortcomings in implementation. Furthermore, chiropractors are uncomfortable with the prevailing attitude that everyone in society is expected or legally required to use this method of infection prevention—there is very little room for variation on this issue.
A careful examination of the statistical data on the effectiveness of vaccination reveals that the procedure is not entirely «safe»—there is no such thing as a vaccine that does not have at least some undesirable side effects. Furthermore, the argument that vaccines are responsible for the near-eradication of many diseases is refuted by evidence that clearly shows that mortality rates from many common infections had already declined by at least 90% before vaccines became available. Furthermore, very few vaccines have been tested in properly controlled clinical trials—the standard method for determining whether something has been proven effective.
In fact, some vaccines have a very high failure rate, meaning they do nothing to protect a person from the disease. For example, most measles cases in recent years have occurred in vaccinated individuals. Their effectiveness can also decline rapidly over time. One example is the hepatitis B vaccine. There is evidence that 4 to 5 years after vaccination, approximately half of those vaccinated are not protected against the disease. Since this vaccine is designed primarily to protect sexually active individuals and/or intravenous drug users, one wonders whether vaccinating newborns against the disease offers any real benefit. This vaccine is causing great concern even among medical professionals. Recently, on August 7, 1999, the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons recommended the immediate suspension of the hepatitis B vaccine for school-age children pending further research into its potential adverse effects.
What will happen?
Many people, including laypeople, scientists, doctors, and chiropractors, are very concerned about the safety of the vaccines currently in use. These concerns include acute reactions—some of them severe—that can occur after vaccination. In particular, the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine has been the subject of a great deal of criticism and controversy in the field of public health. Today, many believe that the risk of serious illness, including death, from this vaccine is greater than the risk of contracting the natural disease. There are a number of people who believe there is a link between the DPT vaccine—one component of which is the pertussis vaccine—and some cases of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, or «crib death»).
There are also many questions regarding long-term safety. In particular, viral vaccines are suspected of being linked to genetic damage and autoimmune disorders. Others consider a person’s total immune reserve—or the ability to successfully adapt to new antigens («germs») throughout life—and argue that this capacity is compromised by the use of many vaccines in childhood, leaving adults unable to make full use of this ability.
Even if a parent or responsible adult feels concerned enough to refuse one or more vaccines for their children or for themselves, social and legal pressures tend to make these wishes seem futile. Virtually all social and political institutions are committed to enforcing the theory of “herd” immunity. Open and rational debate about the risks and benefits of vaccines is not encouraged in this era of compliance «for the greater good.» People can obtain information only if they seek it out for themselves. When they do, they discover that, for example, laws requiring vaccination compliance almost always allow for exceptions for those who need or want them.
Conclusion
The only conclusion that can be drawn is that there is absolutely no sure way to eliminate the risk of infectious diseases—all we can do now is reduce the risk to acceptable levels through various means. Many chiropractors insist that patients should remain free to choose for themselves how to reduce that risk.
[…] INFECTIONS […]