Many of us have been searching the internet, opinion of others, and inevitably encountering celebrity doctors, modality practitioners promising medical and health truth.  Much like for thousands of years we inevitably run into what we call "snake oil" (coincidentally it's high in Omega-3 EFAs) even if it's the ultimate truth but because of the confusion, we fail to look into the deeper complexities.

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." -- Winston Churchill 1942

It's fascinating to think that the obsession with nutrients, vitamins, and combo stacks is not a recent phenomenon. This fixation has been present for thousands of years. In ancient times, our ancestors would become fixated on the "magical" properties of herbs, plants, and roots, believing that they could enhance their performance. Even during the medieval era, commercially packaged "nutrient packs" existed, which people would purchase to improve their daily lives. This inclination towards optimizing our well-being might even be an evolutionary advantage that allowed our ancestors to harness the resources around them, resources that other animals couldn't utilize.

Throughout my life, I have come to realize that there are numerous effective approaches to address health concerns. However, it is common for individuals to feel uncertain about which path to take. I, too, found myself in this predicament for a significant portion of my life. For instance, there seems to be a devoted following of alternative health practitioners, including chiropractors, massage therapists, and even nudist colonies. While these methods may provide some relief, they often fall short in directly tackling the underlying causes of illness. Their effectiveness is limited and lacks the precision required for comprehensive healing. It is crucial to explore more comprehensive and precise solutions that target the root cause of health issues. By doing so, we can truly achieve the dream of feeling better and enjoy long-lasting well-being.

Table Of Contents

Numerous individuals have grown skeptical of medical doctors, particularly those who have encountered health issues themselves or have witnessed their loved ones going through the entire medical system, only to receive unsatisfactory solutions for seemingly trivial problems. But have we ever stopped to ponder why this is the case?

The truth lies in the fact that most practitioners function within a bureaucratic framework, similar to the one we encounter in our daily work lives. If we could acknowledge this reality, we would cultivate greater empathy and compassion for these unfortunate souls who frequently have to confront abusive individuals burdened by frustration and illness.

Celebrity doctors and modalities seek cult followings

Many people obtain their information from "celebrity doctors" such as Dr. Oz, Dr. Drew, and Dr. Phil are just a few examples of doctors who owe their rise to fame to the support of celebrities. Both Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz were fortunate enough to receive Oprah's endorsement, which propelled them into the spotlight. These doctors have managed to cultivate a dedicated following and achieve celebrity status, whether it be through the endorsement of a well-known figure or by building their own presence on social media. Celebrity doctors have become such prominent figures in our society that they are now venturing into the realm of politics. 

The convergence of celebrities and cult leaders is a fascinating phenomenon. In our culture, celebrities possess an almost god-like status, which is quite intriguing. Furthermore, the combination of medicine and celebrities creates an awkward yet intriguing modern revelation. For nearly a century, the American Medical Association strictly prohibited doctors from advertising themselves and attaining celebrity status. However, in 1975, this rule was abolished, allowing doctors to elevate themselves to a pedestal-like position. These esteemed doctors not only possess impressive credentials but are also easily recognizable. Just envision their attire, such as the iconic scrubs or the white coat, coupled with the stethoscope gracefully draped around their necks. These distinctive symbols grant them immense credibility.

Obsessed with singular, often fad supplements & concepts & celebrity healers

I saw and still see many people around me showing me photos of the latest singular supplement, the latest food, the latest celebrity doctor promoting reductionist remedies (concentrating on only 1 or a few symptoms) without explaining how each of us are individuals and that we need individualized analysis of the foundational elements of our bodies which include amino acids (proteins), essential fatty acids (think fish and butter), vitamins, minerals and all those that make the thousands of substances in our bodies that we need on a continual daily, adequate dosage. 

This is the confusing propaganda that misleads us all

There's no such thing as a "balanced diet" & nutrition isn't merely food. Why is that? It's because we're all individuals. Orthomolecular nutrition is the individualized analysis application of the substances within the food which our bodies often do not obtain enough of and are often blocked by antagonists.

I receive many videos from friends, family and acquaintances from Youtube and other sources of "celebrity doctors" such as Dr. Berg, Dr. Mercola and many others.  In these videos they speak in detail regarding specific health issues and remedies for them.  The problem is this is the same mindset we have when we become sick and attend a Doctor's office or emergency room for a remedy.

This is not to say what these people are doing is wrong, but we have to realize the context in which they operate. 

Most of them are in the business of selling singular supplements, concepts and treatments rather than entirely advocating for an individualized analysis of the body using systems biology methods that an increasing number of medical professionals are using.  According to many sources including this one by BMJ Nutrition (a mainstream medical journal): "Modern medicine traditionally has focused on discovering treatments in response to diseases. There is a growing recognition that when clinicians look first to biology to seek answers, we can better define and apply more effective treatments, particularly to address and often reverse the many sources of ill health that afflict people today." Source

This sort of singular thinking is the same method your medical doctor uses along with the eventual endless specialists he/she sends you to with the goal of only alleviating symptoms rather than explaining to you that your body is composed of the above elements. Their orientation is not to ultimately prevent and solve these health problems is by analyzing what the cells of your body needs and this often is mainly what goes into your mouth and what comes out of your body. 

This video is what many people think the study of "nutrition" is: tame, benign and only about food.

An exercise in commercialism

Yet, this singular symptom management mindset is a concept many, many people can't break themselves out of.  They view themselves and their bodies, along with the above-mentioned singular concepts, ideas, celebrities and popular "healthy"  foods as part of some kind of exercise in commercialism.  Despite numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses indicating the ineffectiveness of most dietary supplements without individualized assessments, the prevalence of many individuals seeking "magic bullet " solutions without that targeted approach prevails mainly because they aren't sure what sub-section of cellular nurtition to turn to. Surprisingly, despite these findings, generalized advertisements supplements continue to be extensively promoted. The primary platforms for disseminating information about these supplements are the Internet and video advertisements (ads).

The biggest problem is that many people convince themselves they are doing "something good for their health" and most of the time they call it a "health kick" to which these mostly psychological effects are temporary.  this is mainly because:

1. They don't know if the supplements they are taking are what their individual circumstances and unique biochemistry need and in what dosage, and on what frequency.

2. They never had any individualized testing whatsoever performed on their body's biochemistry, nor their lifestyle, along with recognition what their daily life does to their bodies.

3. They become apathetic and confused mainly by advertisements found online promoting the latest fad diet, supplement by celebrities.

4. They lack the concept that their bodies are less complex than plants and that plants obtain better healthcare than humans do.  In fact, most don't know the medical system is "sick care" oriented rather than true health care.

5.  Many people see price tags associated with individualized testing and suspect they can't afford it, yet the contradiction is they often spent thousands of dollars on supplements per year only with a guess of what they are doing based on generalized studies they often read online.  This is yet again mostly for singular remedies without recognition of the systems biology approach that we need.

Most don't realize there's 2 branches of science: reductionism & systems science

In the world of biology, there are two contrasting approaches: reductionism and systems biology. Reductionism focuses on one factor to explain phenomena, while systems biology takes into account multiple factors to describe the behavior of dynamic systems. In the reductionist approach, critical factors directly determine outcomes. However, in the systems view, factors depend on time, space, and context. Reductionism relies on linear, predictable, and deterministic models to explain system behavior.

Reductionism operates under the assumption that comprehending the individual components of a system allows for a complete understanding of the system as a whole. On the other hand, systems biology takes into account the notion that certain behaviors, like bifurcations and chaos, emerge at a higher level and cannot be observed solely by examining the individual parts. These emergent behaviors are crucial in unraveling the intricate workings of an organism.

On the other hand, the systems approach emphasizes nonlinearity, sensitivity to initial conditions, probabilistic outcomes, and chaotic behavior. When it comes to health in medicine, the systems-oriented perspective implies robustness, adaptability, and a dynamic understanding of homeostasis. In contrast, the reductionist approach focuses on normalcy, minimizing risk exposure, and maintaining static homeostasis. Clearly, the reductionist and systems views on biology are quite distinct from each other.

Many people are confused and apathetic

It doesn't help that many mainstream publications unfairly and wrongly label and group all "alternative medicine" into the same group and often disparage the whole field without mentioning the specifics. 

Establishment medicine has long attempted to suppress alternative practitioners by using legal authorities to apprehend, penalize, and imprison them, citing concerns about public safety due to their unlicensed practice of medicine. Consequently, numerous unconventional doctors have faced substantial fines and even incarceration. However, they have retaliated with great force. On one hand, they have effectively campaigned for legislation that grants them legal recognition in various states across the country. On the other hand, they have cultivated an appealing public image as exceptional caregivers, which has resonated with American consumers. This image is rooted in a unique medical philosophy developed in the early 19th century, which alternative practitioners of all kinds have embraced ever since. By examining the principles of this philosophy, one can identify striking similarities between the unorthodox medicine of the past and the alternative medicine practiced today.

Ortho-molecular medicine, a fascinating and relatively unknown field of medicine, focuses on harnessing the body's natural healing abilities to combat chronic diseases using natural nutritional therapies. Dr. Abram Hoffer, a Canadian psychiatrist and a pioneer in this field, has successfully treated over 100,000 patients with schizophrenia through an individualized approach that emphasizes the importance of two key vitamins: Niacin (Vitamin B3) and Vitamin C. However, it is important to understand that this is not just another celebrity doctor story. Many people make the mistake of solely focusing on these two nutrients, failing to grasp the broader concept.

The key is to recognize that the human body is a complex system, influenced by the interplay between various elements within it, as well as the substances we consume and the toxins we encounter in our daily lives, such as those found in our workplaces. Additionally, the constant stress we experience can deplete and disrupt the body's biochemistry. By adopting a holistic perspective and considering the intricate relationship between our bodies and the environment, orthomolecular medicine offers a promising approach to improving our overall well-being and combating chronic diseases.

The article I'm about to discuss fails to acknowledge the validity of the highly effective and valid Orthomolecular Healthcare paradigm. It's quite puzzling why they choose to dismiss it other than the fact that , perhaps due to a lack of awareness like many individuals I encounter. This omission seems to be part of a larger campaign against alternative healthcare practitioners, which is a story worth exploring in its own right. The article below appears to be yet another effort to undermine fields such as orthomolecular medicine, discouraging potential newcomers from joining this remarkable field.

I was confused for most of my life as well

In fact, I was looking into this field back 25 years ago and ran into the website mentioned "quack watch" and this further made me question this field and mostly entirely dismiss the very valid and more scientific information it provides than the "guess work" that modern medicine has become over the past 70 years.

It didn't help that these practitioners are often restricted from advertising their abilities and specialies and if they are, it's often to such a vague degree that most simply dismiss it entirely.  Back 25 years ago it was also very difficult to identify those practicing it.  The fact is that most practitioners labeled "naturopathic doctors' practice it but there are also very large restrictions placed upon them even for the most simple and entirely safe procedures.  

Below is an excerpt from the website "quackwatch" that doesn't delve much at all into the details for what should essentially be termed "botany for humans" instead of the "butcher for humans" that conventional medicine has become over the past 70 years.  "Modern medicine"  concentrates on reductionism and viewing the human body as separate parts and thus only treating symptoms rather than finding the root causes and correcting them on a cellular nutritional level.

"The human body has limited capacity to use vitamins in its metabolic activities. When vitamins are consumed in excess of the body’s physiological needs, they function as drugs rather than vitamins. A few situations exist in which high doses of vitamins are known to be beneficial, but they must still be used with caution because of potential toxicity. For example, large doses of niacin can be very useful as part of a comprehensive, medically supervised program for controlling abnormal blood cholesterol levels. “Orthomolecular” practitioners go far beyond this, however, by prescribing large amounts of supplements to all or most of the patients who consult them. This approach can result in great harm to psychiatric patients when used instead of effective medications."  Source Quackwatch.org

A world of opposites and inversions

Here in this article they do not delve whatsoever into the details such as this field of medicine that should be termed conventional uses systems biology rather than the reductionist view of the human body that mainstream medicine does.

"Practicing (modern) medicine is more guesswork than actual science" -- Dr. David Eddy, MD, PhD, a former heart surgeon turned mathematician and health care economist.

On a critique of this website in question there were a series of legal battles between the founder of QuackWatch against those who cricitized it.  In the 2001 newsletter, Koren shed light on some interesting facts about Barrett (the founder of Quackwatch). Despite presenting himself as a medical expert, it was revealed that Barrett hadn't held a medical license since the early 1990s. Not only that, but Koren also highlighted a $10 million racketeering lawsuit that had been filed against Barrett, although it was later withdrawn. Koren didn't hold back in calling Barrett a "quackpot" due to the inconsistencies on his website and his lack of credentials.

"The de-bunker has been de-bunked. I am pleased and satisfied with this outcome for Dr. Koren and am proud that Dr. Koren did not succumb to the pressures of the intimidation of Barrett’s legal wrangling. Not everyone can stand up to someone as well known as Barrett."  -- Carlos F. Negrete of San Juan Capistrano

Negrete continued, "It is another great day for health freedom and alternative healthcare around the world. I am especially pleased that this most important victory was in Barrett’s own hometown. It just goes to show you that there is justice anywhere, even when you are a visitor challenging the home team. Barrett is a shill for the medical and pharmaceutical cartels and his bully tactics and unjustified discrediting of leading innovators, scientists and health practitioners should not be tolerated." Source