Guns Don't Kill People, Doctors Do !
US Gun Statistics
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health Human Services)
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
Yes, that is 80 million.
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.000188.
Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."
FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!
Out of concern for the public at large, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention.
Re: Guns Don't Kill People, Doctors Do !
<a href="http://www.silver-colloids.com/Book/SilverColloids-s.pdf">Colloidal Silver PDF file</a>
The following article taken from <a href="http://www.tetrahedron.org/index.html">Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz' site</a>:
<a href="http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/colloidal_silver/Colloidal_Silver_Research.html">The Chemical and Physical Basis of the Therapeutic value of colloidal forms of Silver</a>
John Marshall Dudley
Silver in its various forms has had a long history of reported therapeutic value. Recently, through the work of Dr. Bob Beck and other researchers, it has become popular, both alone, as well as part of a 4 part protocol advocated by Dr. Bob Beck claiming cures for an almost astounding number of ailments from the cold and flu to lupus, aids and cancer.
However, a search of literature has revealed that there is no consensus on how it works, or even what it does. Most discussions appear to be pure theories or speculation with little or no supporting scientific evidence.
Silver colloids are analyzed from a nuclear, chemical, catalytic, and physics perspective to determine what the expected action is on various pathogens as wel as its effect, if any, on so called good bacteria.
The result is that what is being generally reported by many people and researchers is exactly what is to be expected. This is important, since winning the approval of medical professionals, and even that of many patients requires that they understand just what a new therapy does and does not do, and how it works.
Silver has been reported to have therapeutic value throughout the ages.
It has been reported that one reason the upper class did not succumb to many of the plagues which almost wiped out many villages was because they ate with silver utensils, off silver plates and drank from silver goblets. Churches did, and still do, use cups made of silver for communion, where one goblet is passed from person to person. Earlier this century people put silver dollars in their milk and wells to ward off spoilage and illness (4).
The knowledge of the miraculous healing powers of silver were so well known that legends of werewolves required silver to kill the lychantrophy, and supposedly, evil witches cowered at the power of silver to eliminate evil.
Even more recently, many researchers such as Bob Beck have reported that silver in a colloidal state eliminates virtually all known pathogens, viruses, fungi, bacteria, protozoa, and yeasts. Yet, it appears that there is no effect on the good bacteria in the intestinal tract, either because it does not attack good bacteria, or it is absorbed into the blood stream before reaching the intestinal tract.
Silver is referred to as a transition metal in chemical literature, along with copper and gold. They are metals that are heavier than the life giving light metals, such as sodium, calcium, and potassium, yet lighter than the toxic heavy metals such as lead, arsenic and mercury. Gold and silver are considered noble metals because they tend to not react easily to form compounds. The transition metals are known for their catalytic properties.
Although ionic silver (such as any silver compound dissolved in water) has very little if any catalytic effect, and macroscopic silver has little effect either. However, very finely powdered silver becomes a very good oxidizing catalyst. Starting with atomic or ionic silver, the catalytic effect increases with particle size until it reaches a peak at some value, then drops off to a much lower level when the particles approach the wavelength of light.
This is easy to explain by examining how a catalyst works. Each positively charged silver atom will attract one negatively charged atom or molecule. Once they touch, the charge is neutralized. If you have more than one positively charged atom of silver in a particle, then each can attract a negatively charged atom or particle. If a clump of silver atoms binds with two negatively charged particles, such as oxygen and something else, these two particles will no longer electrostatically repel each other, but will be brought together and will react, oxidizing the particle.
The larger the particle, the more positively charged silver atoms can attract oxygen and other negatively charged particles to the surface. However, if particle size becomes too large, then the amount of silver hidden in the center of the particle means that the increase in mass, which goes up with the cube of the diameter, is increasing faster than the active surface areas, which goes up at the square of the diameter. The catalytic effect thus peaks at some particle size and decreases with respect to the amount of silver if the size is increased further.
Bacteria come in two forms - anaerobic and aerobic.
Earlier this century it was discovered by Dr. Gram that he could stain bacteria with a specially prepared Gram stain, and that in general good bacteria stained, but pathogenic bacteria did not stain. It was later discovered that the pathogenic bacteria are negatively charged. Pathogenic bacteria are anaerobic, and if oxidized will die. Thus, to prevent oxidization, they carry an enzyme to specifically repel negatively charged oxygen. If this enzyme is disabled so that they lose this negatively charge, or if oxygen is supplied in a form such that it is reactive to negatively charged pathogens, such as ozone water or hydrogen peroxide, the bacteria will be oxidized and the reaction is ultimately lethal to the pathogen.
It thus follows that negatively charged bacteria, and negatively charged oxygen will both be attracted to and will bind with silver particles. Since the negative charge is neutralized through an electron transfer with the particle of silver each can now easily combine with the other, and will do so, oxidizing the pathogen an destroying it.
Specifically it has been determined that with anaerobic bacteria and viruses oxygen reacts with the sulfhydryl (-S-H) groups surrounding the surface and removes the hydrogen (converting it to water) so that the sulfur atoms form an -R-S-S-R bond. This interferes with the organism's transport or membrane proteins and deactivates them.(5)
Not only will it result in the catalytic oxidation of the bacteria or other pathogens, but since almost all pathogens are negatively charged and the silver is positively charged, the silver and pathogen are attracted to each other via a static attraction causing interactions much faster and at much larger distances than would be expected by pure chance of collision.
However "aerobic bacteria, those that breath oxygen, do not carry a negative charge. This enables the good bacteria to attract oxygen which they require to breathe. One would expect that aerobic bacteria would not be killed by silver.
However testing done at University of Tennessee under our directions has shown that colloidal silver is also quite effective in killing aerobic bacteria. The method by which the aerobic bacteria are killed is still under investigation.
It has been previously thought that the reason that colloidal silver does not affect the good bacteria in the intestines was because it did not kill good bacteria. We have proven this to be false. Further investigation indicates that colloidal silver is unable to move around and interact with bacteria when in a gel or solid matrix.
This in conjunction with the fact that most if not all of the silver, when particle size is correct, will get absorbed through the stomach lining and into the blood stream, most likely accounts for the lack of killing the good bacteria in the intestines.
It should be clear now why silver colloids are extremely effective at destroying pathogenic bacteria, yet do not affect good bacteria in the intestines or mammal cells. Yet the reports on the effectiveness of silver colloids, when compared with normal antibiotics, still seem to call into question why silver is so much more effective, often effecting a cure in hours, when powerful antibiotics may take days or weeks.
There are a number of reasons why silver seems to have much more effectiveness than normal antibiotics.
Here are a number of them:
1. Colloidal silver is positively charged; most antibiotics do not carry a strong positive charge. This causes silver to virtually seek out and destroy pathogens, instead of simply having to move around until they happen to bump into each other. This effect is quite appropriately referred to as the "Silver Bullet" effect by Dr. Beck.
2 Silver kills immediately by oxidizing the pathogen. Antibiotics do not affect viruses at all, and for bacteria will only kill the bacteria when it tries to divide (penicillin type antibiotics) or will prevent the pathogen from dividing (tetracycline type antibiotics). In the first case, it may take the bacteria several days before it attempts to divide; and in the second case the bacteria is not killed at all, but just prevented from replicating. In both cases, the immune system must take care of most or all of the pathogens.
With silver, they are killed outright immediately.
3. Silver is a catalyst. Thus, as soon as a particle of silver has oxidized a pathogen, the pathogen loses it's negative charge and floats away, and the silver is free to attack another pathogen. Antibiotics usually bind with the pathogen and for each pathogen destroyed, one particle or molecule of the antibiotic is used up.
The result is that silver will usually give a much faster kill than an antibiotic. The down side of this is that the high and rapid kill rate can result in Herxheimer's reaction or healing crisis (1). The body simply does not have time to eliminate the huge amount of toxins and dead pathogens that can result from silver water.
Other therapies which work along similar lines such as ozonated water are reported to cause the same problem. It is highly recommended to never initially give therapeutic dosages of colloidal silver to a severely ill person, but to give small amounts initially and work up to therapeutic dosages in a couple of days. This allows the kill rate to be maintained where the body can eliminate the dead pathogens and toxins without undue stress. Of course, drinking large amounts of liquids can help flush the toxins and should be encouraged.
Other Possible negative effects
As most people know, silver is used as the photo-sensitive ingredient in almost all photographic processes. Silver compounds, when exposed to light, will often result in the silver being reduced to atomic or metallic silver. Then in the presence of a developer, any silver compounds that contact the silver particles will also undergo a reduction reaction, enlarging the silver particle.
While this process is essential to photography, it is undesirable in the skin of a person. It is thought by many that the reason that the royalty long ago were called blue bloods is because the silver from the goblets and wares would react with acids in their drinks and foods, then precipitate out in their skin giving them a bluish color.
It is known that consumption of silver compounds, such as silver nitrate, followed by exposure to sunlight can result in a graying or bluing of the skin, a medical condition called argyria (2). As it turns out, a number of chemicals that can appear in the blood make quite effective developers. Caffeine and tannin are just two of them (3).
Fortunately, colloidal silver, when made by the electrolytic process in pure distilled water without any salts being added, produces no silver compounds. Thus, silver plating out of colloidal silver is not possible; the silver particles are already reduced to pure silver, and are mutually repulsed, because of their positive charges.
However, if the colloidal silver is made from silver salts by reduction chemistry, (as the high ppm level products are) traces of silver salts can remain.
Although silver metal is non-toxic to mammals, silver salts are poisonous because of the associated cations, and can result in argyria (2).
Also, when colloidal silver is made by the electrolytic process and salt or sea salt is added, silver salts will be produced as well. Although, in an emergency, one would be wise to make one's own silver water using techniques previously given by Dr. Beck, for long term use all exposure to silver salts should be avoided.
The use of table salt (sodium chloride) will produce some Silver chloride. This is undesirable, and although the amount of silver chloride is limited by it solubility in cold water to 89 PPM (6), this is still a significant amount of silver compound comapared with the amount in the colloid itself (5 to 10 PPM).
The use of sea salt which many people recommend is especially disturbing. Sea salt contains many compounds, including various nitrates and fluoride. Many of the compounds can combine with silver to produce silver compounds. Specifically silver can combine with nitrates forming a highly soluble and toxic silver nitrate salt and with fluoride producing highly soluble and toxic silver fluoride. Nitrates in sea salt can run as high as 20 ppm, and fluorides are typically 40 ppm (7).
Therefore colloidal silver should be only made with pure distilled water to prevent the formation of any toxic silver compounds. If one must use an accelerating agent, then adding a small amount of previously produced colloidal silver is recommended, over adding any type of salt.
Effectiveness verses particle size
Several publications indicate that for absorption through the stomach wall, particles must be .015 micron (15 nm) or smaller. Traditionally particle size has been determined by electron microscopy. This technique is quite slow and tedious, resulting in a procedure which is both slow and inaccurate. The absorption band of silver colloids increases in wavelength as the size of the particles increase. This allows a qualitative measurement on the particle sizes in a colloid by use of a scanning photospectrometer. Ionic silver has an absorption band in the uv, and thus is virtually clear. As more atoms aggregate into a particle, the absorption band moves from the uv into the violet, blue, green, yellow, orange and red.
Since the color of a substance is the complement of the color absorbed, colloidal silver will go from clear to very light yellow, gold, orange, red, blue and green. (CC) p 65. Colloids that contain a broad range of sizes can absorb wavelengths across the spectrum resulting in brown and black. It is generally accepted that only clear to light gold silver colloids have particle sizes small enough to be effective, and to be able to reach the blood stream.
1. FUNGUS The species specific understanding of, and difference between bacterial phase and fungal phase developments in blood pictures. Michael Coyle. Explore! 1997.
2. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 76th Edition 1995-1996 CRC Press. David R. Lide Editor in Chief. P 4-27.
3. A Use for that last Cup of Coffee: Film and Paper Development. Dr. Scott Williams. http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-coffee.html
4. Health Consciousness Magazine Vol 15, No 4.
5. The Development and Functions of Silver in Water Purification and Disease Control. The Silver Institute. Richard Davis & Samual
6. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 52th Edition 1971-1972 page B-135
7 ibid. F-165
Re: Guns Don't Kill People, Doctors Do !
<a href="http://www.garynull.com/documents/iatrogenic/deathbymedicine/deathbymedicine3.htm">Death by Medicine - 3</a>
Gary Null PhD, Carolyn Dean MD ND, Martin Feldman MD, Debora Rasio
Note: The information on this website is not a substitute for
diagnosis and treatment by a qualified, licensed professional.
home previous next
Never before have the complete statistics on the multiple causes of iatrogenesis been combined in one paper. Medical science amasses tens of thousands of papers annually - each one a tiny fragment of the whole picture. To look at only one piece and try to understand the benefits and risks is to stand one inch away from an elephant and describe everything about it. You have to pull back to reveal the complete picture, such as we have done here. Each specialty, each division of medicine, keeps their own records and data on morbidity and mortality like pieces of a puzzle. But the numbers and statistics were always hiding in plain sight. We have now completed the painstaking work of reviewing thousands and thousands of studies. Finally putting the puzzle together we came up with some disturbing answers.
Is American Medicine Working?
At 14% of the Gross National Product, healthcare spending reached $1.6 trillion in 2003.15 Considering this enormous expenditure, we should have the best medicine in the world. We should be reversing disease, preventing disease, and doing minimal harm. However, careful and objective review shows the opposite. Because of the extraordinary narrow context of medical technology through which contemporary medicine examines the human condition, we are completely missing the full picture. Medicine is not taking into consideration the following monumentally important aspects of a healthy human organism: (a) stress and how it adversely affects the immune system and life processes; (b) insufficient exercise; (c) excessive caloric intake; (d) highly-processed and denatured foods grown in denatured and chemically-damaged soil; and (e) exposure to tens of thousands of environmental toxins. Instead of minimizing these disease-causing factors, we actually cause more illness through medical technology, diagnostic testing, overuse of medical and surgical procedures, and overuse of pharmaceutical drugs. The huge disservice of this therapeutic strategy is the result of little effort or money being appropriated for preventing disease.
Under-reporting of Iatrogenic Events
As few as 5% and only up to 20% of iatrogenic acts are ever reported.16,24,25,33,34 This implies that if medical errors were completely and accurately reported, we would have a much higher annual iatrogenic death rate than 783,936. Dr. Leape, in 1994, said his figure of 180,000 medical mistakes annually was equivalent to three jumbo-jet crashes every two days.16 Our report shows that 6 jumbo jets are falling out of the sky each and every day.
Correcting a Compromised System
What we must deduce from this report is that medicine is in need of complete and total reform: from the curriculum in medical schools to protecting patients from excessive medical intervention. It is quite obvious that we can’t change anything if we are not honest about what needs to be changed. This report simply shows the degree to which change is required. We are fully aware that what stands in the way of change are powerful pharmaceutical companies, medical technology companies, and special interest groups with enormous vested interests in the business of medicine. They fund medical research, support medical schools and hospitals, and advertise in medical journals. With deep pockets they entice scientists and academics to support their efforts. Such funding can sway the balance of opinion from professional caution to uncritical acceptance of a new therapy or drug. You only have to look at the number of invested people on hospital, medical, and government health advisory boards to see conflict of interest. The public is mostly unaware of these interlocking interests. For example, a 2003 study found that nearly half of medical school faculty, who serve on Institutional Review Boards (IRB) to advise on clinical trial research, also serve as consultants to the pharmaceutical industry.17 The authors were concerned that such representation could cause potential conflicts of interest. A news release by Dr. Erik Campbell, the lead author, said, "Our previous research with faculty has shown us that ties to industry can affect scientific behavior, leading to such things as trade secrecy and delays in publishing research. It's possible that similar relationships with companies could affect IRB members' activities and attitudes.”18
Medical Ethics and Conflict of Interest in Scientific Medicine
Jonathan Quick, Director of Essential Drugs and Medicines Policy for the World Health Organization wrote in a recent WHO Bulletin: "If clinical trials become a commercial venture in which self-interest overrules public interest and desire overrules science, then the social contract which allows research on human subjects in return for medical advances is broken."19
Former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Dr. Marcia Angell, struggled to bring the attention of the world to the problem of commercializing scientific research in her outgoing editorial titled “Is Academic Medicine for Sale?”20 Angell called for stronger restrictions on pharmaceutical stock ownership and other financial incentives for researchers. She said that growing conflicts of interest are tainting science. She warned that, “When the boundaries between industry and academic medicine become as blurred as they are now, the business goals of industry influence the mission of medical schools in multiple ways.” She did not discount the benefits of research but said a Faustian bargain now existed between medical schools and the pharmaceutical industry.
Angell left the NEMJ in June, 2000. Two years later, in June, 2002, the NEJM announced that it will now accept biased journalists (those who accept money from drug companies) because it is too difficult to find ones that have no ties. Another former editor of the journal, Dr. Jerome Kassirer, said that was just not the case, that there are plenty of researchers who don’t work for drug companies.21 The ABC report said that one measurable tie between pharmaceutical companies and doctors amounts to over $2 billion a year spent for over 314,000 events that doctors attend.
The ABC report also noted that a survey of clinical trials revealed that when a drug company funds a study, there is a 90% chance that the drug will be perceived as effective whereas a non-drug company-funded study will show favorable results 50% of the time. It appears that money can’t buy you love but it can buy you any "scientific" result you want. The only safeguard to reporting these studies was if the journal writers remained unbiased. That is no longer the case.
Cynthia Crossen, writer for the Wall Street Journal in 1996, published Tainted Truth: The Manipulation of Fact in America, a book about the widespread practice of lying with statistics.22 Commenting on the state of scientific research she said that, “The road to hell was paved with the flood of corporate research dollars that eagerly filled gaps left by slashed government research funding.” Her data on financial involvement showed that in l981 the drug industry “gave” $292 million to colleges and universities for research. In l991 it “gave” $2.1 billion.
The rest of this comprehensive study is <a href="http://www.garynull.com/documents/iatrogenic/deathbymedicine/DeathByMedicine1.htm">HERE</a>.
Re: Guns Don't Kill People, Doctors Do !
"Out of concern for the public at large, I have
withheld the statistics on lawyers for the fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention."
I get it. :-)
Re: Guns Don't Kill People, Doctors Do !
Leading Cause Of Death In The US ? – :-o :-o :-o
Doctors – Leading Cause Of Death & Injury In The US – P1
Doctors – Leading Cause Of Death & Injury In The US – P2
Drugs & Doctors – May Be The Leading Cause Of Death In The US
US Doctors 3rd-Leading Cause of Death In The US
Guns & Doctors – Which Is The Most Dangerous?
US Gun Statistics - Doctors More Dangerous Than Guns
|All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:56 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.