The next few blog entries will be my attempt to provide an understanding of the 5 Biological Laws as discovered by Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer. I am using the book 'Disease is another thing!' (I imagine the title is somewhat less awkward in italian...) written by Marco Pfister and Simona Cella. The 5 Biological Laws, which were called 'New Medicine' by Dr. Hamer, give an entirely new understanding of how diseases develop. It answers both how and why we get sick and requires a complete shift in paradigm of medicine. To describe what I mean by shift in paradigm, let me share the analogy used in the book of "changing the room". Our fundamental view on health is that of a battle field, where our immune system fights disease which is "bad". Now, whether you have a completely allopathic view and believe that diseases must be fought with aggressive drugs and surgeries or prescribe more to the naturopathic / holistic view of treating the whole person, supporting the immune system in order to heal the person, fundamentally the view point remains the same. That is: the disease is bad and needs to be fought. To get back to the my analogy, you can re-arrange a bunch of furniture and even bring in a whole bunch of new furniture, but ultimately you are still in the same room, a room that is defined by the philosophy of the battle field. What the 5 Biological Laws require is that you step into a completely different room. This of course can be a challenge because you will be tempted to evaluate this new room based on what you learned in the previous one. In other words, if you've always known the world to be the center of the universe and flat, then the thought of a round planet that orbits the sun can be a challenge.
So I hope for those who read the next few blog entries, that you will allow yourself to step into a new way to look at health and what we call disease. If you find yourself intrigued, I hope you will explore this subject a bit further. I will do my best to provide you with some more resources in English. I also want to caution you from looking up Dr. Hamer on Wikipedia and forming your opinion on this entire subject solely on what you find there.
Finally, I want to clarify that the 5 Biological Laws are not a new form of treatment or therapy. They are a set of laws that provide an entirely different framework for describing the complex and complicated phenomena of "health" and "disease". The beauty of them lies in their simplicity as well as in the fact that they are verifiable by everyone. Once you fully understand this subject matter (and this may require a bit more than simply reading the next few blog entries here) you will be able to verify these laws next time you 'catch and cold' for example.
So I hope you will allow yourself to be challenged in your views and go on a journey with me. Remember that if history has taught us anything, it's that chances are, what we currently know to be the truth isn't really. At some point, it was believed that disease was punishment from god for our sins and thank goodness we got over that one! (at least most us did...) So, give this a try and see if this can serve us as a better model for explaining what happens in our bodies.
I've read around a bunch about Hamer, and I'm afraid that I have come to the conclusion that he is a dangerous madman.
ReplyDeleteI should add something else: I sincerely and fervently hope that you do not put your health in the hands of Hamer or anyone who is following his ideas (and that as few other people do so as well).
ReplyDeleteI was sorry to read your comments Andrew. That's a pretty harsh judgement. Hamer is undoubtedly a complex character who is frustrated and far from perfect. However, before you dismiss everyting he's discovered, I recommend the book "Danke Dr. Hamer" by Claudio Trupiano. Trupiano is part of the Italian associate ALBA, they somewhat distanced themselves from Hamer and are working toward a dialog with the Italian health authority in order to verify the biological laws. See rather than attacking, incarcerating and threatening, why not just calmly examine these laws and either verify or prove them wrong? Seams much more reasonable.
ReplyDeleteYes, people have died while following practitioners of this New Medicine. Then again, thousands of people die everyday under the care of MD's and nobody calls then dangerous madmen. Lets just take a look at a different way of understanding so called disease processes. And if it is wrong, it will be easy to prove wrong.
At the end of the day I just want to share something I am reading about that I find interesting and ultimately everyone can form their own opinion, including you. It just seems to me that you came to a very harsh judgement quickly and some further examination may serve you well. Again, the book I recommended is a good read....
cheers.
I'll put aside my judgment of Hamer's sanity for the moment, and consider two of his claims:
ReplyDelete1. In a sense, he's saying that you can cure cancer with psychotherapy. At best, this is exceedingly unlikely. At worst, it's utter nonsense.
2. The rings he sees in CAT scans are artifacts of the scanning process:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_computed_tomography#Artifacts
That refutes his claim that the rings are symptoms of the DHS.
*
I've read up quite a bit about Hamer because, like so many discoverers of approaches to alternative medicine, he tells a story about how he came to make his discoveries -- and his story is full of striking details. I've written a rather long poem about it, trying to get inside Hamer's head a bit. I can send it to you if you like.
*
But to return to my claim about Hamer's sanity: he says that there is a Jewish conspiracy to suppress his ideas so that Jews can use them but keep non-Jews from doing so:
'Die Juden würden selbst die GNM anwenden und "zu 98 Prozent überleben", erklärt er, "während meine deutschen nichtjüdischen Landsleute und alle Nichtjuden gezwungen werden sollen, weiter die idiotische jüdische Gutartig-Bösartig-Religionsmedizin zu erdulden, an der man zu 98 Prozent an Chemo und Morphin stirbt".'
http://www.taz.de/1/archiv/archiv/?dig=2006/01/30/a0080
So I stand by my conclusion that he is a dangerous madman (a fascinating one, yes, but still utterly frightening).