FW: Statutory regulation for herbal practitioners

From: Andrew Johnson

Date: 2011-02-21 13:13:15

Attachments :Mr Andrew Lansley Feb 2011.doc I was sent this and given permission to circulate. From: Julia Spivack [mailto:constantia1@btintern…] Sent: 18 February 2011 17:40To: ad.johnson@ntlworld….Subject: Fw: Statutory regulation for herbal practitionersImportance: High     —– Original Message —– From: Julia Spivack To: lansleya@parliament…. Cc: Glenda Tizard ; Glenda Tizard ; Zofia Dymitr ; David Cameron ; DORRIES, Nadine ; DORRIES, Nadine ; info@joininghandsinh… ; info@grammasintl.com ; info@apa.uk.com ; mail_me@homeopathy-s… ; info@britayurpractit… ; Tredinnickd@parliame… Sent: Friday, February 18, 2011 2:49 PM Subject: Statutory regulation for herbal practitioners Dear Mr Lansley,   Please see attched letter to yourself which is being circulated to herbal medicine practitioners   Kind regards   Dr Julia Spivack      Mr Andrew Lansley Secretary of State for Health 153 St Neots Road
Cambridge CB23 7QJ     Friday 18th February 2011   Dear Mr Lansley,   Re: Statutory Regulation of herbal medicine practitioners   This is an open letter to all practitioners of herbal medicine, traditional medicine such as Ayuvedic medicine, Traditional Chinese Medicine etc and professional homeopaths.   I note that as a result of pressure from lobbying, initiatives by the Government are finally underway to provide statutory regulation for practitioners of herbal medicine in a bid to circumvent the coming EU Directive to ban the sale of herbal products.  Statutory regulation is considered to safeguard the continued availability of herbal medicine to the public from statutorily registered herbal practitioners and also “protect the public”.    Herbal and traditional medicine practitioners have been begging the Government to give them statutory regulation as a “knee-jerk reaction” to the EU directive.  Of course this is exactly what the EU hoped and expected them to do – the commonly deployed “problem-reaction-solution” – which the naiive herbal practitioners have fallen for hook, line and sinker.   Statutory regulation will throw herbal medicine practitioners and public health freedom rights from the frying pan into the fire.    I resigned from the register of the General Osteopathic Council (GOsC) last year because it is too dangerous for patients (and practitioners !).  The GOsC caused the death of a member of the public by harassing their osteopath over nothing at all – the Department of Health have been informed of this but they are not interested.  The GOsC refused to do anything about a bogus osteopath reported to them by members of the public and osteopaths.   There is a steady trickle of osteopaths resigning because the principles and tenets of osteopathy, and indeed safe medical practice, are being undermined and sabotaged.  I was labelled with a “mental condition” or a “personality disorder” by the GOsC because I did First Aid to try to save someone’s life and in this the GOsC exceeded their powers under the Osteopaths Act. !!   Since I resigned I still refer to myself as an osteopathic physician on my website and this is supposed to be a criminal offence under the Osteopaths Act 1993 and yet the GOsC have not sought to prosecute me.  Why haven’t they prosecuted me?  The reason is they know I have too much evidence of their incompetence and corruption.   The same reason they never tried to prosecute osteopaths Mr John Wernham and Dr Anthony Matthews who had sufficient integrity to challenge the GOsC.   I am the only person to have conducted a formal study of the statutory healthcare regulators and the outcome overwhelmingly is that their real agenda is to protect the pharmaceutical cartel and patients are sacrificed to this agenda.  So many doctors – Jayne Donegan, Patrick Quanten, Sarah Myhill, Andrew Wakefield, to mention a few have been driven out of their profession by the General Medical Council (GMC) for exposing the truth about vaccination, for not prescribing “enough drugs” or promoting natural medicine to their patients.   Dr Rita Pal was labelled “mentally ill” by the GMC for voicing her concerns about deficiencies in the care of elderly hospital patients in Staffordshire NHS Trust.   The GOsC acts as “agent provocateur” to generate and amplify complaints targeting those osteopaths who are a threat to the agenda.  They use psychiatric assessments illegally to witch-hunt osteopaths and manufacture fraudulent cases against them.  They use the complaints mechanism to reduce scope of practice so that osteopathy has been reduced from a complete system of medicine to a mere manual therapy with auxiliary status within the allopathic hierarchy.    When the GOsC opened their register they threw the Osteopaths Act out of the window and made up their own bizarre rules.  The GOsC council decided that everyone’s Diploma in Osteopathy was invalid except of course the Diplomas of the osteopathic members on the GOsC council.   Funny that isn’t it – how there is one set of standards for GOsC council members and another set of standards for the rest of the profession they are regulating !    The disciplinary hearings of the regulators are not based on the judicial principles (ie Judeo-Christian principles of justice) we are all used to – they are kangaroo courts based on Corpus Juris (EU law).  The same is going on in chiropractic.  Approximately 500 chiropractors (1/4 of the profession) have resigned their registration with the GCC.  In a formal survey of the chiropractic profession conducted by Bankside Law, London, 77% of chiropractors said they had no confidence in the GCC as a regulator.  Osteopaths and chiropractors are prosecuted for things they haven’t done even when there is material proof they are innocent.   The statutory regulators are quangos set up with a UK Parliament shop front but in reality they are a back door for ushering in the EU dictatorship and Corpus Juris.  So if you accept “statutory regulation” from the “UK government” you are in fact playing straight into the hands of the EU dictatorship in order to escape EU legislation to ban herbal medicine !!.  Like the mice heading for the piece of cheese in the mousetrap to escape the cat !    If you become statutory regulated your herbs will be taken away from you anyway – but much more than your herbs will be taken away – the very tenets and foundations of your practice will be destroyed because all statutory regulated practitioners have to conform to the biomedical model.  The global healthcare arena is controlled by the pharmaceutical cartel to which our government kow tows. 7.8 million people in the United States alone died from iatrogenic disease caused by allopathic doctors in the period 1990 to 2000 – see Death by Medicine By Gary Null, Ph.D., PhD; Carolyn Dean MD, ND; Martin Feldman, MD; Debora Rasio, MD; and Dorothy Smith, PhD.  How many people have died from herbal medicine and homeopathy ? Herbs are naturally occurring living plants whereas drugs are synthetic chemicals that do not occur in nature.  It’s ludicrous to apply the same criteria to herbs as is applied to pharmaceutical drugs.  People have been using plants for their medicinal properties for millennia.  We have a God given birthright to use plants for medicinal purposes without any interference from Government or corporations.  Many people rely (myself included) on herbal medicine and homeopathic medicine as an inexpensive form of healthcare and this EU directive will cause the cost of what herbal medicines are left to skyrocket making it unaffordable for patients and putting many herbal medicine practitioners and homeopaths out of practice which is of course the aim.  The true purpose of statutory regulation is to destroy natural medicine by stealth. The solution to protecting herbal medicine is not statutory regulation, but for our politicians to grow a back bone and get this country out of the EU and give the power back to the people.   Yours sincerely,       Dr Julia Spivack BSc (Hons), DO, MSCC, MICO, Dip Hom, MSc (Ayur) Primary Care Physician in Natural Medicine (qualified in Pharmacology, Osteopathy, Homeopathy, Ayurvedic Medicine)   Copy:   David Cameron PM Nadine Dorries MP David Tredinnick MP Ayurvedic Practitioners Association British Association of Accredited Ayurvedic Practitioners Society of Homeopaths Alliance of Registered Homeopaths Homeopathic Medical Association All herbal medicine practitioners and professional homeopaths           Appendix 1     An extract from the home page of my website www.constantiaclinic.co.uk   Cure versus symptomatic treatment:  Symptoms are a sign of a disturbed constitution and the body`s attempts to self-heal or compensate or adapt The constitution is the state of vitality of the tissues, the integrity of the intelligence that runs the body and the capacity to self-regulate and self-heal.  When the person is subjected to too many demands, stresses, toxicity and traumas the body`s self-healing mechanisms become overwhelmed and break down. To attempt to treat the symptoms on a piecemeal basis does not cure the underlying disturbance in the constitution and is dangerous because repeated palliation eventually results in suppression.  Suppression of the symptoms masks the underlying constitutional disturbance which continues and eventually progresses to a more serious disturbance in the constuitution.  Therefore it is “false economy” to treat symptomatically. Although suppressing the symptoms can often provide immediate relief, which is attractive to the patient. However unless the disturbance in the constitution is addressed the same symptoms will keep returning and if the suppression is continued eventually the body will produce symptoms at a deeper level in the body indicating a more serious constitutional disturbance.   For example if a skin eruption is suppressed the constitutional disturbance may then manifest as a lung disturbance, if this is then suppressed the constitutional disturbance may then progress an manifest in the joints for example. Symptoms are usually the result of the body trying to eliminate toxicity.  if the channels of elimination are blocked then the body will try to find a place to store the toxicity – in fat tissue (obesity) in water (water retention – “bloating”), in joints (arthritis) and eventually in cysts and tumours (neoplasm or cancer).  The constitution can also have inherited weakness called “miasms” – eg asthma and eczema often run in families due to the “tubercular miasm”.  Constitutional treatment aims at eliminating toxicity and clearing miasms and strengthening the vitality. In the correct practice of medicine (followed by all traditional and indigenous cultures) the physician interprets the symptoms reported by the patient together with the signs found on clinical examination to understand in what manner the constitution has become disturbed and to endeavour to restore integrity to the constitution.  Recovery from chronic disease follows Hering`s Law of Cure. “The bu$£ne$$ with d£$ea$e” Modern medicine invents names or labels to denote each of the myriad ways in which the body produces symptoms of a sick constitution and presents them as different “diseases” which need a myriad of different drugs to control them.  In reality there are no different diseases there are just many ways in which a toxic or sick constitution expresses its disturbance.  There is a huge vested interest (ie the pharmaceutical cartel and “the business with disease”) in the population becoming and staying sick and getting sicker.  The government and the medical profession collude in this agenda. The way to health is not to “treat the name” but to heal the disturbance in the constitution.          Appendix 2   Extract from Accepting the Death of Osteopathy by Dr James Jealous DO     1            This is a recording of a lecture given at the AOA (American Osteopathic Association) convention October, 1999.  The topic of the lecture is ‘Accepting the Death of Osteopathy’ and it’s a difficult topic for anyone to follow unless they’ve lived in the daily practice of traditional osteopathy.  It’s actually a lecture that probably doesn’t have much meaning unless one has had an experience with true osteopathy, and I mean having felt the healing forces in the patient or having had a sense of the real depth of osteopathy as a healing science.  So, it is really focused on people who have been in practice and have been practicing traditional osteopathy for a while.   2            Traditional osteopathy is a term I use that means one is in a family practice setting, treating all types and ages of patients with all types of diseases using the perceptual skills of osteopathy.  It means using ones hands as a primary therapeutic tool to find the health and the therapeutic process in the patient.    Traditional practice is living; it’s living the precepts of osteopathy in oneself.  It is the striving to learn from nature the laws of healing.  It is the augmentation of an innate healing power within the patient.  It is an act of devotion to a specific body of knowledge that is clinically safe, effective, and guided by reason perched upon the mystery of the Divine.   3            My relationship of osteopathy has been the central axis of my professional and spiritual life.  This lecture focuses upon accepting, accepting the death of osteopathy as an individual.   It’s not about action to be taken by committees, groups, or institutions. It’s about ones self, ones relationship to osteopathy, and deepening ones personal insight and sense of direction.  It is a topic I have lived and have found very healing.  Accepting the death of osteopathy opens the way to a new-found inspiration that replaces an old pattern of grief.  We have all lived in despair most of our professional lives, watching osteopathy be defiled, degraded, forgotten, and turned more and more into an allopathic clone.  My goal in speaking is not to degrade but to state the facts that we all know are true.  I’m not speaking out of anger but out of love for the true spirit of osteopathy.  I’m also speaking out of a desire to see it living again in its fullness.  Osteopathy has died.  What remains is only an empty skeleton of a dynamic gift we were once given.  The essence of osteopathy is gone, extinguished.  Today we are relating to a ghost, co-dependently and neurotically fixated upon imitating allopathic medicine.  Many believe this is an illusion.  They think that imitating allopathic medicine is an evolution for the profession.  It is not an evolution; it is cloning.  It is completely irresponsible to the suffering individuals in this world to reduce their options for health care, for healing.   4            Osteopathy is an alternative method of practicing medicine.  It was founded by an MD who saw the necessity for a safer, more effective, more holistic profession.  Osteopathy was a gift to humanity.  It was there to help.  We have allowed ourselves to fail in our responsibilities to our fellow man.  My argument here, again, is not against allopathic methods but for the richness of osteopathy.  Osteopathy is gone.  It has died.  Today many will point to OMM (Osteopathic Manipulative Management) as osteopathy.  However useful, OMM is not osteopathy.  Osteopathic practice is for the treatment of all diseases, not just somatic dysfunction of the neuromuscular skeletal system.  OMM and the AAO (American Academy of Osteopathy) are in fact the only campfires still burning upon the vigilant plains of waiting, waiting, waiting for a change that will free osteopathy to allow it to resurrect itself to serve humanity.  But osteopathy has died.  Our schools do not teach osteopathy as a primary education.  Many, in fact, are ashamed of traditional principles.  The few students who really want osteopathy and who don’t lie on their applications spend their free time trying to find osteopathy, but it’s gone.  These students are ridiculed for being osteopaths by the majority of students and faculty who trivialize their interest in osteopathy.  The school administrations generally lack social integrity because they do not understand that they are not giving the general public the gift of osteopathy.  The schools are teaching allopathic medicine.  We don’t need more allopathic doctors; there are plenty.  We need the alternative of osteopathy.  We owe it to humanity to be osteopaths, but the dilemma is who remembers how to do a full practice using osteopathic principles?  Are there any teachers who remember the whole sense of living osteopathy?    5            If I say osteopathy has died, perhaps I should define the character of osteopathy as I have learned it and perceived it in 30 years of practicing traditional osteopathic medicine.  So let me review for you my understanding of what osteopathy is so that you can get the picture of, in a sense, in colloquial terms where I am coming from.   6            First of all, osteopathy is an alternative to orthodox medicine.  It’s an alternative to orthodox medicine.  This truth should be obvious.  It’s not.  Osteopathy is about finding the health of the patient.  This is a direct perceptual skill; it’s not just an idea about making a person healthy.  It’s a living truth.  Finding the health in the patient is the learned art of directly perceiving something other than disease in the patient, a skill that therapeutically engages laws of healing not recognized by orthodox medicine.  The gift of this wisdom is all but forgotten.  It was part of the life blood of osteopathy, part of a challenge to us as individuals, to be a truly unique profession.    7            Secondly, osteopathy awoke us, humanity, to the role of the autonomic nervous system in health and disease.  This tremendous insight was profound.  As science has matured, it has noticed the relationship of stress to disease.  Today most Americans are aware of the role of stress in upsetting the balance of the health.  Osteopathy, however, was way ahead of even today’s common medical knowledge because it had the skill to directly interpret, to directly interpret and influence autonomic activity using perceptual and palpatory skills.  The level of awareness that can be developed in this regard is much greater than any scientific instrument.  The capacity to sense, interpret, and interface with autonomic nervous system control and influence cellular trophicity with a clear awareness of specific changes; this perceptual skill is lost.  It is gone from our teachings and the skill has died.    8            How many patients coming into a family practice setting in the 1990s have diseases or symptoms that are the result of sympathetic overload?  Perhaps 80%, I really think a lot more; perhaps 80% of disease is directly traceable to autonomic nervous system imbalance.  Think about this for a moment – just think about it.  How many patients that walk into your office have diseases that are traceable to autonomic nervous system imbalance?  Let’s take a look at most of the intestinal problems that we have.  Let’s take a look at the immune problems we have, with eczema, asthma, migraine headaches.  You take a look at all of the programs here at the AOA convention, and you could sit down and treat most of these things osteopathically.  But how many of your patients, if their autonomic nervous system was balanced, if the sympathetics and parasympathetics could operate as a whole, and there wasn’t a lot of interplay with sympathetic overload; if the trophicity of the cell, its ability to recover from stress, was normalized what would happen?  How many of those patients would need to be on medications or need to be frustrated by their illnesses?  But where are the tools and the insights to treat this epidemic?  Drugs do not cure cause.  Period.  We have failed in our responsibility to humanity by letting this truth die.  Today we worship only the ashes – the living osteopathy is gone.   9            Thirdly, for me, osteopathy when alive taught us to have a sense of the whole patient, not by engaging all the parts but by a direct sense of the whole.  The whole is the least division of life.  Are these just words, medical poetry, or have we actually lost the skill of this understanding?  Have we actually lost the capacity to see this living whole and its health and the beauty and the dynamic of it?    10         The fourth category of osteopathic truths that remains buried, in my opinion, is that osteopathy is a relationship between man, nature and the Divine.  So osteopathy professed a relationship with nature and God that had meaning.  It was not poetry, it had meaning.  Osteopathy did not see nature as a child of science.  It saw nature as a reflection of the great and loving wisdom of the Creator.  This truth was not a religious cult; it was a fact of common sense.  Man is not the creator of life nor is he as smart as he would like to have us believe.  This perspective that man, nature, and God are in direct relationship creates a sense of balance in the physician’s degree of self-importance.  Osteopathy, by its very nature, could mold the ego into a position of compassion, compassion being not empathy but the capacity to see the Divine in ones patients.  This principle places osteopathic thinking and practice in a very unorthodox position.    11         In order to be brief, I will explore only one more principle of practice, and that is that osteopathy prevents disease.  Understanding and helping the autonomic nervous system to balance plays an important role in interrupting the momentum of involutionary patterns of living.  Understanding diet, exercise, perception, and the autonomic nervous system are incredibly powerful tools in preventative medicine.  Osteopathy has in a sense lost its role in serving humanity.  For me, realizing that osteopathy has died brings us as individuals to a point of fact where we must reconcile this loss.      

Related articles...

Comments are closed.