You’ve probably never heard of Ignaz Semmelweis. But you – and anyone else who visits a doctor, clinic, or hospital today – owes him a lot. Maybe your life.
You see, back in the 1840s, Semmelweis was put in charge of two maternity wards. One was staffed by doctors; the other by midwives.
Early on, Semmelweis noticed women attended by doctors were five times more likely to die from “childbed fever” than those cared for by midwives. He set himself to find the difference.
After testing every variable, Semmelweis found the difference. The doctors often delivered babies after performing autopsies. Could “cadaver particles” be causing the fevers that killed new mothers?
Semmelweis took a simple step. He had the doctors wash their hands before attending a birth. The death rate among new mothers dropped like a stone. But when Semmelweis left his position, the hospital abandoned hand washing.
Twenty years later, Scottish surgeon Joseph Lister wrote an article for The Lancet. In it, he proposed doctors should clean their hands and instruments after each surgery. His article was based on his own experience… saving limbs and lives with the simple act of washing.
Like Semmelweis, Lister’s idea faced resistance from the medical establishment. But by 1875, the washing of hands and surgical instruments was widely accepted.
We often think of stories like these as showing how far we’ve come since “the old days.” But here’s the thing… The same attitudes doctors had in Lister’s day are still alive and well in the medical community. And they could be holding your health hostage.
You see, mainstream medicine has a blind spot. One that’s been around for a long time.
Modern Medicine Killed George Washington
After leaving office, our first president went back to working his farm. Late in 1799, after a day outside in wind, rain, snow, and hail, Washington became ill.
Three doctors were called to his bedside. Washington had chills, a cough, fever, and shortness of breath. There was just one thing to do, the doctors agreed. It was the standard medical practice.
They bled him. Four times. In all, these medical professionals drained 40% of Washington’s blood. Is it any wonder he died?
But here’s the thing: These men were absolutely certain they were performing a sound medical procedure on the ailing president.
Half a century later, the mainstream scoffed at Semmelweis and Lister. Because they knew better.
And that’s mainstream medicine’s “blind spot.” They generally think what they “know” is set in stone. Except it’s not.
Take vitamin B9, for example.
The Folate Folly
Mainstream medicine says you shouldn’t get more than 1 mg of folate (vitamin B9) per day. If you get too much, they tell us, it can cause nerve damage.
Except a brand new study from Queen Mary University and the University of London finds that’s not true. In fact the study suggests there’s no need at all for an upper limit for folate intake.
The researchers discovered the upper limit was established using a flawed logic. You see, the limit is based on studies involving people with a vitamin B12 deficiency… but treated with folate (B9).
It appears any nerve damage was due to the shortage of B12 and not from getting too much folate.
Look at it this way, if your car ran out of gas, would you fill the tank with diesel and expect it to run well? After all, they’re both petroleum products.
Of course not. But that’s exactly what these studies did. And when the substitution didn’t work, they blamed the wrong side of the equation.
There’s no upper limit for other B vitamins, the study’s authors point out… and there’s no need for a limit on folate, either. But for years, mainstream medicine “knew” too much folate causes nerve damage.
Another recent study reveals where the mainstream may “know” something that’s simply wrong.
Sugar and Cancer
Back in the 1920s, a German doctor and chemist named Otto Warburg made several cancer breakthroughs. One of the most important is known as “The Warburg Effect.”
Warburg discovered that cancer cells use a different form of respiration than healthy cells. Instead of using oxygen – or aerobic respiration – cancer cells largely ferment sugar to create energy. In simple terms, cancer cells have a different metabolism than healthy cells.
But cancer research has focused on genetic factors since Crick and Watson described the structure of DNA in the 1950s. And Warburg’s work has been largely ignored.
Now a team at Duke University has confirmed sugar does play a major role in cancer survival. But not just by providing energy through fermentation.
Sugar, they discovered, also has a role in cell signaling in tumors. Even tiny amounts can help ensure survival of cancer cells.
It’s a discovery that might have been made decades ago. If the mainstream’s blind spot hadn’t blocked out Warburg’s work.
The Warburg Effect is just one of his cancer breakthroughs. Now you can discover how his ideas could lead to the elimination of cancer… how mainstream medicine has suppressed this vital information… and why the Cancer Industry doesn’t want a cancer cure.
You’ll find it all here in “Life Without Cancer”.
About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.
“The Doctor Who Championed Hand-Washing And Briefly Saved Lives,” National Public Radio. Jan 12, 2015.
Eschner, K., “The Idea of Surgeons Washing Their Hands is Only 150 Years Old,” Smithsonian.com. Mar 16, 2017.
“Dec. 14, 1799: The excruciating final hours of President George Washington,” PBS News Hour. Dec 14, 2014.
Apple, S., “An Old Idea, Revived: Starve Cancer to Death,” New York Times. May 12, 2016.
“Starving Cancer Cells of Sugar – Does It Work?,” Duke-NUS Medical School. Jan 27, 2018.
© Copyright 2018 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.