By A Midwestern Doctor
The Forgotten Side of Medicine
December 23, 2024
One of the human body's most incredible aspects is its capacity to adapt to many different environments and tasks. Unfortunately, this adaptability has a significant drawback. The earlier in life an input enters one's system, the more of a long-lasting effect it has on each aspect of one's being. Psychologically, for example, experiences in early childhood (e.g., abuse or trauma), including those so early on the individual can't even consciously remember them, can often pattern the rest of the individual's life (and in many cases their descendants as well).
Tragically, that principle has also been deliberately utilized throughout history to create obedient subjects.
Note: this principle has also been abused throughout history to create lifelong loyalty (e.g., this is the reason why the fast food industry devotes so much marketing to children, and McDonald's puts such a big focus on Happy Meals).
Similarly, within medicine it's well recognized that being exposed to a toxin or infection as a fetus ( especially in the first two months of life) can be immensely consequential for the rest of their life (e.g., by causing birth defects).
Unfortunately, this principle is frequently ignored (e.g., by pushing the COVID vaccine on pregnant mothers). Many of us believe the wanton disregard of it (e.g., with the bloated childhood vaccine schedule-the harms of which are discussed further herer) is a root cause of many of the chronic illnesses our society now faces.
In this article, I will cover a danger most of our children are exposed to that is seldom recognized.
"Safe and Effective"
One of the foundational axioms (truths) medical students are taught from the very start is that vaccines are "safe and effective" and that the only reason anyone believes otherwise is that they were misled by Andrew Wakefield's fraudulent autism study (as opposed to say serious concerns about vaccines causing severe neurologic injury existing for over a century).
As such, you see routinely remarkable situations like students being taught about SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) and being told, "We know it clusters around 2 to 4 months (and always occurs by 6 months)," but "We still don't know what causes it" while simultaneously wholly ignoring the fact those are the exact same times infant get their largest dose of vaccines, or that for a century physicians and parents have pointed out certain vaccines caused SIDS.
Thus, if you ever question the safe and effective vaccine narrative (particularly since so much of a doctor's identity is wrapped in the mythology that medicine "saved humanity" with vaccines), it is typically a lost cause and often leads to strict professional reprisals from the majority of your peers.
In turn, despite my willingness to challenge medical dogmas, I was quite hesitant to write this article. This is because:
•While some doctors are open to the idea vaccines can be harmful, almost none feel that way about ultrasound.
•I've noticed doctors are typically much more willing to question the safety of drugs that are not routinely prescribed within their speciality than those that are (e.g., I am yet to meet a dermatologist who will acknowledge Accutane is dangerous, whereas I've met many psychiatrists who have serious reservations about it-as they frequently have to deal with the psychiatric side effects it creates). In the case of US, I am a fan of the myriad of things it makes possible, so I am effectively trapped by a similar bias that leads to a reluctance to question this practice.
However, as I thought more about it, I realized US's routine use in obstetrics has several remarkable parallels to childhood vaccination. In both cases, initial serious concerns about the safety of the practice existed throughout the medical profession. Yet, as time went on, the lucrative market the product created pushed those concerns to the wayside. Before long, the government sanctified the safety of the practice, at which point an inexorable proliferation in its use occurred. In time, virtually everyone had forgotten those concerns existed and that the vast proliferation of its use might have consequences or that any ethical reason existed to test its safety.
Most importantly, both of these practices harm the most vulnerable members of society (who cannot speak out for themselves), so what follows needs to be said.
The Medicalization of Childbirth
A classic way any industry creates profits is to create markets and monopolies out of thin air. In turn, throughout medicine, we see a recurring pattern-a previously "normal" condition is medicalized, and the population is eventually convinced they need to perpetually purchase products for said condition (a process referred to as "disease branding"). For example, in this article I showed how effectively this was done with "depression." Likewise throughout this publication, I've shown why many of the vaccines we routinely give our children just really aren't needed.
Note: the relative risks and benefits of each childhood vaccine are discussed in more detail here.
One of the worst places this has happened is with childbirth, where what was previously seen as a natural process has been transformed into a medical emergency that requires the constant attention of a medical team. As best as I can tell, this began with Harvard's (influential) first professor of obstetrics, who initiated the push to replace female midwives with male physicians and in 1820 stated:
Women seldom forget a practitioner who has conducted them tenderly and safely through parturition they feel a familiarity with him, a confidence and reliance upon him which is of the most essential mutual advantage.... It is principally on this account that the practice of midwifery becomes desirable to physicians. It is this which ensures to them the permanency and security of all their other business.
Since that time, there has been an increasing medicalization of childbirth, which while helpful has also created a massive number of highly consequential complications for both the mother and child (to the point we advise home birth whenever it is feasible).
Note: home birthing, the dangers of hospital births, and the issues with fetal heart rate monitoring (a common part of the hospital birth process) will be covered in the next part of this series.
In all of this, the key principle to understand is that the earlier something is changed in a human being (and most other living organisms), the more profound and lasting the consequence will be for the human being. As such, we frequently find that the chronic issues patients have, originated during childbirth and in many cases, before they were even born (e.g., due to an emotional shock to the mother). This in turn, helps to explain why harmful obstetric interventions can often be so consequential for a child and why it is such a tragedy our society does not afford the reverence, respect, and support to mothers you see in many other nations (e.g., for a Westerner, it's remarkable to observe the respect and care China gives to pregnant women).
Note: many modern obstetric practices are done to shield doctors from liability for any complications children experience. Yet, despite being by far the most expensive place to give birth to a child (excluding Japan), 0.56% of American infants do not survive childbirth, resulting in over 50 nations (including every affluent one) having a lower infant mortality rate than the United States. Likewise, the US ranks 65th in the maternal death rate from childbirth-all of which indicates we may be focusing on the wrong things in childbirth.
EMF's and Childbirth
With electromagnetic fields, we're told that:
•The only way electromagnetic radiation can damage the body is by creating ionizing radiation that breaks apart molecular bonds, creating free radicals that damage DNA.
•The EMFs we are routinely exposed to (e.g., from cell phones) are far too weak to be ionizing radiation.
•Therefore, any idea that common EMFs can cause issues is highly unscientific and misguided.
Unfortunately, this set of arguments ignores two major points:
•First, many biological structures are incredibly sensitive to EMFs, and as a result, fields far lower than what we are commonly exposed to can create physiologic effects.
•Microwaves (which are utilized by many modern wireless technologies such as cellphones, wifi, and radar) are uniquely suited to be absorbed by biological tissues, and therefore are "toxic" at non-ionizing doses.
Note: in addition to what I (and many others) have witnessed in a large number of EMF-sensitive patients, there is a large body of evidence demonstrating that EMFs can have adverse physiologic effects (e.g., see this book and this book and this article). Much of this was done in Russia as they lacked the commercial interests to censor that research (as acknowledging the harm of EMFs in the West would be very damaging to the military and the wireless industries).
Since little things done to a fetus during gestation can be immensely consequential for the rest of their lives, many have wondered if EMF exposure during pregnancy can affect the child's long-term health. In turn, there is some supporting evidence for this. For example:
• Researchers at Kaiser Permanente gave pregnant women EMF meters to wear for 24 hours. The children of women whose exposure exceeded 2.5 milliGauss were more than six times as likely to be obese as teenagers than the children of mothers whose exposure was lower than that amount.
•Suspecting there might be a link between EMF exposure and neurological disorders, Dietrich Klinghart (a renowned integrative medicine physician) conducted a study where he compared the prenatal EMF exposures of 10 neurologically impaired children (8 of whom were autistic) with 5 controls. He found high prenatal EMF exposures dramatically increased the risk of neurological disabilities:
Note: Klinghart has also Understanding How EMF Can Endanger Your Health – Interview With Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt a study conducted by Wolfgang Maes that found EMFs were 20 times stronger inside the womb than outside it. If this is true (I have not been able to find the study), it would confirm many ancient beliefs about pregnancy, and also suggest US is particularly dangerous to things within the womb.