On how nutrition 'science' becomes marketing 'business'
Globally, the food industry uses every possible means to make their products more appealing and to expand their sales volume. One of the methods employed is to highlight the positive aspects of their products while omitting the negatives, thereby protecting their products from being recognized as harmful. This would all seem logical and understandable if not for the involvement of science, large sums of money, power, and selfish personal interests. The pharmaceutical industry employs similar methods as well. If a product in the mass information space starts to be associated with causing health problems, discrediting it involves all sorts of tactics, including the involvement of science. Where there's demand, there's supply – 'scientists' who have sold their heart and soul, ready to even slander their colleagues, are found. The compensation for their services, of course, employs much more sophisticated methods than direct cash payments.

The range of manipulations is broad. For example, taking one of the product's many components as the research object. Let's say, saturated fats found in pizza, sausages, burgers, or acrylamide in chips, crackers, etc. The study group continues to consume these same products as before, only with a reduced amount of the substance considered harmful. To make the study appear more convincing, several groups are formed in parallel. Since one harmful component is replaced with others, essentially nothing changes. Predicting the study results is not difficult, because reducing the amount of the harmful component in the product leads to minor changes as the missing harmful substance is replaced, increasing the proportion of other harmful substances, and it turns out that the tested component does not affect health. Even the numbers don't need to be fudged. The media conclusion – scientists have tested the effects, and the study results show no cause for alarm. Another example is a carcinogen and a substance that increases the activity of enzymes that suppress this carcinogen. Depending on the sequence in which this substance enters the body through diet, the results can be very different, so it's only a matter of choosing the desired sequence, depending on the interests of the study's sponsor. As for the aforementioned examples, objective consumer information on the product's impact on health can threaten the food manufacturers' business. Therefore, such studies are another way to deceive consumers. Manufacturers realize it would be too risky if consumers understood the truth - that animal proteins and thermally processed carbohydrates, in any form and combination, promote the well-known 'affluence' diseases.

Without looking at the diet as a whole, it's impossible to significantly improve health if only one unhealthy component is modified or replaced with another unhealthy component. Here's a simple example: replacing fats with meat in a sausage does not make an unhealthy diet healthy, nor does removing a harmful substance from a product, like removing acrylamide from chips, make it healthy. Studying each nutrient separately, without making radical changes to the diet, does not clarify the path to health. As long as completely isolated chemical substances and individual dietary components are studied, but scientists keep coming up with sensational hypotheses about complex relationships between diet and disease, there will be no clarity.

The majority of society - children, pensioners, and the many who work for a meager salary, will never be able to fund scientific research, sponsor political parties, or provide various benefits to scientists. Meanwhile, those who go to the pharmacy or clinic to see a dietitian, family doctor, to learn more about maintaining their health, will receive recommendations that will please the producers of industrial chemical food and the pharmaceutical industry. What these recommendations will be is not hard to predict.

It's not surprising that it's difficult, I would say impossible, for the average person to navigate the sensational headlines in the media, where trivial details are emphasized, ripping information out of context. Based on such contextually removed details, conclusions are made about complex relationships. The same product can sometimes be attributed diametrically opposite properties. As a result, attention is diverted from much more important factors that could influence radical changes in the diet. Therefore, it's no wonder that health-themed magazines present diametrically opposed views on the impact of the same product on health. Magazines profit from drug advertisements and have become a marketing tool for the pharmaceutical industry. In the field of medical education, research on the causes and treatment of diseases without drugs is almost not considered. How can there be a curious situation where companies that profit from people's illnesses teach those same people how to be healthy!

Should it be that food producers, profiting from what we eat, are entitled to tell us what to eat! Logically, consumers should decide whether a specific product is needed, as they are the ones who ultimately pay for the scientists' work. Nothing in nature has changed. It's just that there are scientists who serve the interests of today's global food industry. The task of scientists should be to provide as truthful information as possible and to leave the decision on what to do with this information to the consumers themselves, who ultimately are the actual payers of the scientists' work.


If in recent years nearly 90% of children are born with greater or lesser health problems, developmental delays, doesn't this growing trend prompt us to think that something is wrong, that it's necessary to cleanse of accumulated pus-like deposits, various slags, and toxins accumulated from childhood before pregnancy, because the immune placental barrier in the era of modern chemistry and antibiotics has significantly suffered and cannot fully withstand the load, hence diseases are formed even before the child is born. For example, treating cerebral palsy in children after birth is pointless; it needs to be considered much earlier. The nation's health problems cannot be solved in oncology and cardiology centers, no matter how much money is invested in them. Even in the country's main children's hospital (Children's Clinical University Hospital), children are served pasta with meat, an absolutely incompatible, bloating, and fermenting combination. How can such products be given to sick children? The responsible officials for such incompetence should be urgently dismissed from their positions. No latest and most expensive medications will help as long as the causes are not addressed. I apologize if this comparison seems incorrect, but with today's inadequate diet, human bodies are often so contaminated that, were cannibalism allowed, such meat would still not be permissible under existing regulations.

In the field of vaccination, the health ministry blindly follows the recommendations of the World Health Organization, but it must be taken into account that this organization is also sponsored by vaccine manufacturers. From the regulatory authorities' side, doctors are encouraged with both 'stick' and 'carrot' to vaccinate as much as possible. If a doctor vaccinates a lot, they receive special bonuses; if little, various inspections follow, threatening with non-renewal of the certificate. The system is built so that it's disadvantageous for doctors to report vaccine-induced complications, hence there are very few reports. Vaccine advocates rely on this misleading statistics, even though doctors face vaccine-induced complications daily.

Everyone needs knowledge about the laws of nature and their own body, how diseases arise and how to cure them. Only these simple truths need to be revealed to people. By not doing so, we create patients and want doctors to cure them. The mass media continuously whines about the lack of funding in medicine. It must be understood that no matter how much money is invested in medicine, if medicine is not in harmony with the laws of nature and tries to deceive nature, any healthcare system reform is doomed to failure.


Otherwise, it won't be...
Each disease has its nuances, of course, there are individual nuances that need to be addressed individually with the condition that you find a suitable specialist who understands and can comprehend biology and biochemistry, but not those doctors who strictly act according to some regulation, which someone has written in someone's interests - here, such chemical preparations 'to get hooked on them', there's no other option, otherwise for you...

Otherwise, there won't be those industries that turn over trillions of EUR. This is modern corporate medicine, a tightly intertwined system aimed at destroying folk medicine - the knowledge accumulated by our ancestors, it is knowledge about nature.

The destruction of nature, placing humans in unnatural living conditions, and, if you add to that, humans consuming an inadequate diet, will inevitably result in diseases and with each generation, diseases will become 'younger'. Diseases that previously affected only the elderly will increasingly affect younger people.

In our society, the consequences of actions ignoring the laws of nature are attempted to be remedied by psychologists, social educators, various assistance services, and ultimately compulsory re-education institutions, etc.

The mass media continuously whines about the shortage of such specialists and the inefficiency of institutions, about the need for additional funding. Of course, the expected result is not and cannot be achieved as long as the true cause is not sought - people are fed by the food industry ignoring health, and the medical industry treats, ignoring food, but doctors' material situation depends on the quantity of sold medications. A completely unacceptable and absurd situation is created!


Nutrition as a tool for governing the people
Looking back in history, it was known even before our era that nutrition is the most effective means of governing the people. In ancient Rome, during the time of Emperor Constantine, in the 3rd century of our era, those who refused to eat meat were forced to drink melted lead. Nowadays, such barbaric methods are not used. There are more sophisticated methods - stores full of much more effective means, such as alcohol veiled under various names, which is actually a protoplasmic poison for the brain and irreversibly degrades a person's intellectual abilities, glasses of this poison are solemnly raised by high-level state officials during festive occasions. What kind of behavior can be expected from the new generation if stores are full of legal narcotics?

Who's Online

We have 573 guests and no members online


                                        About Medicine

Scientists predict that in the coming years, almost any organ necessary for humans can be grown in laboratory conditions from stem cells. However, it is unlikely that such a method will solve problems as long as the causes are not eliminated, and the lifestyle that has led to such a situation is not changed. Even if the health protection budget is increased several times, it is unlikely that there will be significant changes in public health.


The Impossible Mission
How to ensure "the wolf is fed and the goat remains alive." A paraphrased version of this saying sounds like - "to ignore the laws of nature and maintain health." This is precisely what we expect from medics, continuously reforming the healthcare system. There is only one problem – it is impossible to change the laws of biochemistry and biophysics, the so-called laws of nature. Unfortunately, this is beyond the capabilities of legislators.

What are these laws of nature? Here are a few. Nature has intended fruits for humans, as the most complete product, while meat and grains are for surviving hunger periods, which can be caused by, for example, droughts or floods. Cow's milk is intended for its calf and only for a specific period. Each animal species has a strictly different milk composition, suitable only for it and not for another species. Fruits in nature are seasonal, meaning there is not always an abundance of food, and there are periods of fasting during which the body performs self-cleansing. Nature has intended continuous moderate physical activity for humans, hence sedentariness and, for example, professional sports do not fit into maintaining health. Humans are meant to drink water and nothing else. The methods of food preservation intended by nature are only these – drying, freezing, sublimation - and not others. Nature did not intend for baking, boiling, or microwaving. Nature dislikes being polluted. For ignoring its laws, nature punishes humans by applying the corresponding "criminal law article" - diseases.

Human illness is the ultimate result of errors in the food production, education, and health protection systems. If a person follows the laws of nature, they should not be sick until the age of 80, but age sets in from 100 years.

It is illogical to subsidize the production of health-unfriendly agricultural products and then invest money in treatment or consequence mitigation. Not everyone can afford "cheap" everyday products, for which one then pays dearly in treatment expenses.

Talking about the most common, starting with bread from grains that are treated with strong poisons before sowing, treated with pesticides during growth, and before harvest to ripen the grains at the same time, treated with glyphosate-containing preparations such as Roundup, Clinix, Ouragan, Typhoon B, and other herbicides that adversely affect our cell DNA. In livestock, feeding such grains results in a large amount of pesticide residues in meat and milk.

Using chemically treated food daily, consequences appear later. But the process has begun, and the appearance of the first symptoms is inevitable. One can try to delay this process with detoxification programs and nutritional supplements. However, it would be simpler and cheaper to consume an adequate diet.


Standing and Watching, Standing and Wondering
In a supermarket, standing in line at the checkout, I was intrigued by the signs in the opposite pharmacy with large letters. It was a modernly equipped pharmacy from a popular pharmacy chain, bustling with people. Since I hardly have any business in pharmacies, I probably have fallen behind in life. Entering, I stand and watch, stand and wonder - from all sides, I am surrounded by signs: "For the Throat," "For the Stomach," "For the Joints," "For the Heart," "For Pain," "For Colds," "For Nerves." Looking at such an offering, one inevitably gets the impression that these organs or organ systems are not interrelated and exist by themselves. How can such health problems be separately resolved when they all have the same common denominator? Therefore, it is no surprise that we increase the health budget every year, but we do not become healthier.

Perhaps it would be more logical to encourage consumers to revise the contents of their shopping carts, so they do not have to go straight to the pharmacy with their purchases to temporarily and seemingly solve problems that such a diet inevitably and guaranteedly shows. Perhaps it is finally time to understand that only by educating the public can we sort out the current pressing health problems of people!


With People Who Do Not Think - What is What, It Is Easy to Manipulate
With such an audience, it is easy to manipulate - advertise, and they start buying. For example, scare them with cholesterol, and they rush to buy cholesterol-lowering drugs. They are told that the residues of herbicides and insecticides in food in permissible amounts are harmless, and people safely use such products, but the pharmaceutical industry, along with industrial food manufacturers, makes huge profits, exploiting the fact that the public naively believes. The reality is that poisons are not harmless; they just have faster or slower effects. The result does not change. Therefore, do not let yourself be manipulated, think, analyze, and make conclusions yourself! Hopefully, this website will help you.


Treat Each Disease Separately
In modern medicine, it has become the norm that different stages of the same process occurring in the body, that is, the states of organism transformation, are called different diseases, and moreover, they are treated by various specialists, each disease separately. For example, a child accumulates mucus in the respiratory tract, develops a runny nose, but the causes are not addressed, and it continues until the next disease appears, initially acute bronchitis, which, if treated with drugs, can turn into a chronic form and increase the risk of pneumonia. Treating pneumonia with drugs does not go without consequences, increasing the chance of developing bronchial asthma, which, if treated with spasmolytics over many years, increases the probability of contracting other diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with severe consequences, such as pulmonary fibrosis or pulmonary emphysema, and moreover, people with such problems are potential Covid-19 victims. Continuing to pollute the body and not performing its cleansing but treating it, for example, with pulmicort, can lead to bronchial spasms or even lung cancer. These are the consequences of the same process and are not random independent diseases, as is interpreted in modern medicine, when different states of the body, depending on their symptoms, are called diagnoses, and of course, medics have a huge arsenal of drugs for each diagnosis.

It often happens that when a patient goes to the doctor, they are prescribed a long list of drug prescriptions. Part of these drugs is intended to suppress the immune system's response cascade (anti-inflammatory, pain relief, antibiotics, etc.), and another part (immunomodulators) to compensate for the missing immunity links that were suppressed by the first part of drugs. In short, some drugs are used to lower immunity, while others to increase it, resulting in the losers being the patients and the winners – the pharmaceutical industry.


And It All Starts Over Again
A TV show featured an employer in a remote region who complained that workers had completely degraded and did not want to work for either small or large sums of money. It also showed a worker having lunch at a table with sausage, a loaf of bread, and instant coffee. That said it all. If this employer had not thought about it until now, it could be reminded that with such daily food, even the most diligent and healthy worker will collapse. As a result, the depressive mood they try to improve for a while, until health completely collapses, with cigarettes, alcohol, or other drugs. There are simply no more optimistic possible variants; miracles do not happen.

For a worker ending up in the hospital, not much changes, there is no live food. Porridge with tea of dubious quality, meat patties with pasta for lunch, decorated with a slice of pickled cucumber, but to make it all go down and ferment better, it is washed down with sweet fruit juice from a tetra pack, naively hoping to get vitamins. It is not unusual if patients have a bottle of cola and a pack of chips or another chemical industry product within arm's reach, while the treating doctor indifferently passes by. Logically, such indifference on the part of the doctor should lead to the temporary annulment of their license, although the problem lies much deeper, in the foundations of the health protection system itself, starting with what is taught to future doctors.

Drugs achieve a temporary illusion of health improvement. This sick worker is discharged from the hospital. Returns to work for their employer. And it all starts over again.


Can It Be Different?
The shelf life of products is increasingly longer, but not human life. There are more and more medicines in pharmacies, but people's health is increasingly worse. The methods of disease diagnostics and treatment are increasingly modern and complex, but there are increasingly more serious illnesses. Medics become more educated, but their workload is continuously expanding. Is there a logical explanation? The short answer would be diet (which, of course, is not the only factor). The human organism is much more complex than we think. About 200 million biochemical reactions occur in the organism every second. Science still does not know many things. Not all enzymes, hormones are known, and not all their synthesis mechanisms, etc. There are only guesses about how torsion fields work, the non-locality of genetic information, the fractality of biological time, the energy-informational field formation - the wave genome. Therefore, relying on human-made medical preparations as safe can hardly be called. Safer is adherence to nature-made and tested products.

WHO (World Health Organization) acknowledges that each subsequent generation is born weaker than the previous one. Only every fourth child, starting school, is without serious health problems. And there is an explanation. In food stores, including various catering establishments, there is only one percent of the offer that works for health with a plus sign. This means that the other 99% of "food" is with a minus sign. There is a saying - you are what you eat. That is exactly true, because within a few years, all cells in a human are completely replaced. There are different bones, different hair, a different heart. For example, erythrocytes are completely replaced within 120 days. Toward illness or health? It depends on the person.

As a small producer, it is important to me who will purchase my production in the future. The overall public health status and population census results, as well as future forecasts and trends, can only delight funeral homes and land buyers for further sale to foreigners. The pharmaceutical industry can also profit for a while. Is such business a priority for Latvia's development?

The pharmaceutical industry mainly deals with symptom relief of diseases, making huge profits from it, and is not particularly interested in people not getting sick. The healthcare system is built in such a way that it creates diseases, because you cannot get money from a healthy person, just as from a deceased. All the money comes from chronically ill patients.

Many are probably tired of fending off intrusive advertising banners online and cleaning their mailboxes from supermarket promotional leaflets with food product offers, if those can even be called food products. Unfortunately, the greed for profit of supermarkets by any means is so great that it takes precedence over common sense. Essentially, food product retailers and manufacturers are sawing off the branch they are sitting on. Maybe it's time to wake up and start thinking about offering and advertising healthy food.

Cardiovascular diseases are currently the leading cause of death in Latvia. They can hardly be called diseases; they are the consequences of an unhealthy lifestyle. Oncology is in second place, although it now aspires to the first place. The number of cases has increased by 40% over the last 10 years. Regular preventive examinations, even the latest equipment and medications, will do little if people's thinking and lifestyle are not changed. There are regions in the world where people hardly get sick with these diseases, and there is no expensive equipment or the latest medications there; they simply do not get sick because they live differently.


What to Do?
It is not possible to solve public health problems by building more and more cardiological, oncological, and other disease centers. It is naive to hope that with newer medications and more modern methods, it will be possible to deceive nature. Humans cannot be smarter than nature, than what created them. One simply needs to observe the laws of nature. Therefore, public health should first be dealt with by the Ministries of Climate and Energy, Agriculture, and Education, and lastly - by the Ministry of Health.

For a person to live normally, there is knowledge that should be learned already in primary school. How is it possible to completely cure something if such knowledge is not even included in the curricula of medical schools or is very minimal. Almost nothing is taught about the physical-chemical properties of water, about the compatibility of products and their possible behavior in the organism, about pollution of the organism and its cleansing, which is the basis of any disease treatment. Not to mention much more complicated areas, such as linguistic genetics, morphogenesis, phantoms, time fractality, where there is still much uncertainty regarding how it works on humans.


Here are some of my recommendations:
  ֍  Health should be discussed in schools from the first to the last grade in the context of natural laws and biochemistry, dietary supplements, household chemicals, cosmetics, and electromagnetic radiation. Schools should teach how to live and survive with these many factors.

  ֍  What else, if not public media, can initiate the process of educating the nation. The media should take a leading role in driving, similar to how it happens with corruption scandals.

  ֍  Introduce a mandatory requirement to indicate on the label whether the product contains GMO ingredients, regardless of the added amount. Whether animals were fed combined feed containing GMO components. This would also apply to beekeeping products (for example, the presence of GMO rapeseed flowers).

  ֍  Introduce a requirement for producers to specify on the product label its composition, for example, for the ingredient "vegetable oil" or "fats" to provide further clarification, what kind of oil, what fats.

  ֍  Prohibit the production of butter with a fat content of less than 82%. Lower fat content in butter can only be achieved by hydrolyzing it. Essentially, these are trans fatty acids (margarine).

  ֍  Nature has intended only two ways to store food without drastically degrading it or killing it – drying or freezing. Only a live cell can transfer nutrients and energy to another live cell. From thermally processed, preserved with conservatives, or otherwise killed food, the organism can derive some benefit only through pathogenic microflora, simultaneously receiving a large amount of toxins and slag. Caring for public health, it would be logical if the government with its regulatory mechanisms would promote precisely these food storage methods.

  ֍  Realize that Latvia, compared to densely populated regions of the world, has not yet irreversibly destroyed nature, therefore it is still possible to produce higher quality food. This priority should be used. The most effective support for the countryside would be educating both existing and potential producers. Organic, environmentally friendly farming requires significantly more knowledge.

  ֍  There is very little talk about Wi-Fi radiation so far, yet it is one of the most harmful high-frequency radiations that everyone encounters, especially where a large number of transmitters are concentrated, for example, in gathering places.

  ֍  Ensure the availability of quality water (with respective physical-chemical properties) at least in kindergartens and schools.

  ֍  Introduce a differentiated tax on food, based on the product's biological value, depending on the impact it has on a healthy human organism.

  ֍  Limit, but best to refrain from products that use thermophilic yeast: bread and confectionery products, also kefir, where a special yeast (unicellular fungus) is used as a starter, as well as drinks with kombucha.

  ֍  In Latvia, we only grow about 60% of the necessary vegetables, but import the rest. If there were a will at the political level, by redirecting agricultural subsidies, it is possible to change the situation, and the volume of domestically produced vegetables can be brought closer to 100%.

  ֍  Promote vegetable fermentation, as a method of vegetable preparation, fermentation is the most effective source of necessary nutrients for humans. Even more effective than consuming vegetables in their raw form. If the overall public health status is important to us, then correctly selected and prepared vegetables and fruits must be our staple diet. Increasing the health protection budget is a less effective solution.

  ֍  In educating new medical specialists, educational programs should emphasize health prevention, not disease treatment. The doctor themselves must be healthy and by their example, promote a healthy lifestyle among their patients. The financing of the medical system should be based on the principle – the less people get sick, the more money remains for medics, not the other way around. There is such a practice in the world - in regions of the country where people get sick the least and there are the most long-lived people, the richest doctors are.

  ֍  It is not possible to solve public health problems by building more and more cardiological, oncological, and other disease centers. Public health should first be dealt with by the Ministry of Climate and Energy, the Ministry of Agriculture, and the Ministry of Education. But lastly, the Ministry of Health should deal with the consequences of the previously mentioned ministries' inaction.

These recommendations do not require large financial investments; they help save money, in the long-term perspective - a lot of money. Economists in developed countries have calculated health sector expenses and concluded - that doing something while a person is still healthy is seven times more economically beneficial than after what happens. Moreover, correcting something before a person gets sick – the risk is minimal, but afterward, the risk of irreversible consequences is huge and financial expenses multiply. Improving the demographic situation in the country, to have more children born, and moreover, healthy, without ignoring a healthy lifestyle, is absolutely impossible.

The choice and alternatives are few: to be or not to be.