THE HEALING ARTS
by Dr. Lawrence Wilson
© August 2018, L.D. Wilson Consultants, Inc.
All information in this article is for educational purposes only. It is not for the diagnosis, treatment, prescription or cure of any disease or health condition.
This article concerns the differences between the most common healing methods, including development science. Some readers will say this article is incomplete, and not fair to some of the healing methods. I have kept the details brief to avoid confusion and keep the article a reasonable length.
THE MAIN WESTERN HEALING ARTS
This is one of the oldest methods of healing used around the world. It may be defined as the use of rocks, plants and animal-based remedies to combat disease.
Most herbs are drugs, meaning that they are somewhat toxic and they can alter bodily symptoms. Many patented drugs today are derived from herbs. These include antibiotics, heart medications, pain killers, hormones, birth control pills, and dozens of others.
A few herbs are purely nutritional products. This means they supply various nutrients and are not toxic at all. Development science uses a few of these herbs. However, most herbs are mild drugs and not suited for development, which avoids toxic substances of any kind as much as possible.
For more about herbalism, and a list of the herbs that are allowed with development programs, please read Herbs on this site.
Allopathy, pronounced a.lop’.a.thy, is the accurate name of modern drug-and-surgery-based medicine. It is the dominant method of health care in all Western nations.
Allopathy is really an outgrowth of herbalism. However, the remedies the allopaths use today are almost all patented versions of the herbs, or some are totally synthetic products. Drugs and surgery are emphasized while nutrition is usually completely ignored.
Major features of allopathic medicine include:
1. One must first diagnose or identify disease entities. Then one prescribes or recommends a treatment or remedy to cure, which means to remove, the entity.
This is extremely important to understand, and is very different from development science, which is described later in this article. For more on this topic, please read Diagnosing Versus Development on this site.
2. Allopathy versus herbalism. Allopathy differs from herbalism because it uses patented remedies. Herbalism uses mainly non-patented and unpatentable remedies to manage disease.
3. Allopathy, unlike herbalism, includes surgery and radiation therapies. Surgery and trauma care are where allopathy performs the best, today.
4. Allopathy versus homeopathy. If you check a dictionary, allopathy is often defined as “a method of combating disease by the use of remedies producing effects different from those produced by the disease itself”.
This is a bit technical and confusing, but the definition is written to distinguish allopathy from homeopathy. The latter is the use of remedies that produce effects similar to those produced by the disease itself. Homeopathy is discussed later in this article.
5. Allopathy today also includes some specialties and “allied healing arts”, especially physical therapy, dietetics, and a few others. Drugs and surgery are central, however, and allopathic doctors are taught that everything else is much less important.
6. Allopathy uses Western mechanical and electrical machines such as microscopes, blood analyzers, scanners and more to assess the body.
7. Allopathy believes in basic medical research, although a lot of it is about developing new drugs – and not about nutrition, for example.
Allopathy today doe not include:
1. Most modern (late 20th and 21st century) nutritional science. This is one of its greatest shortcomings. The drug industry just does not want it, as they know many of their drugs would not be needed if modern scientific nutrition were part of regular medical care.
One hundred years ago the drug doctors used more nutrition, but this has declined over the past 100 years. Meanwhile, the food and diets have become much worse.
2. Most Eastern or Oriental diagnosis and healing methods such as acupuncture.
3. Most holistic laboratory testing such as hair mineral testing.
4. Most newer diagnostic labels used in holistic medical care such as chronic candidiasis, brain fog, chronic fatigue syndromes, and others.
5. Allopathy rejects chiropractic and osteopathic manipulation of the tissues, as well as deep bodywork.
The best features of allopathy. These are modern surgical techniques, and modern trauma care, in most cases. However, there is a lot of unnecessary surgery, and all surgery is toxic and carries risks of infection, errors, and other complications. For details, read Surgery.
The worst features of today’s allopathy. These are:
2. Vaccination and other so-called preventive measures such as mammograms and water fluoridation.
3. Toxicity of many drugs. For more, please read Dangerous Drugs.
4. Overprescription of drugs and polypharmacy, especially overuse of Antibiotics, statin drugs, anti-depressants and a few others.
5. Defensive medicine and other structural problems of modern medical care. For more, please read Your Doctors Priorities.
This website wants to be fair to all systems of healing and to all physicians and their clients. However, in general, modern allopathic medical care today is disastrous in that is not effective enough, does not address deeper causes of disease, costs too much, and harms people with its toxic drugs and unnecessary surgeries and procedures.
CHIROPRACTIC, OSTEOPATHY AND BODY WORK
These may be called structural healing arts. They all involve manipulation of the bones, muscles and soft tissues for healing purposes. They have been practiced for millennia.
Modern origins. In 1874, Andrew Taylor Still, MD, (1828-1917) in Missouri founded osteopathy as a separate science of bone and tissue manipulation. In 1895, D.D. Palmer (1835-1914) in Ohio founded a somewhat similar science he called chiropractic.
Both men wrote extensively about the theory and practice of correcting slight displacements in the positions of the vertebrae, and also correcting displacements in the other joints and tissues. These displacements, some of which are called subluxations, impinge upon the nerves that supply energy to the tissues, and as a result, impair health. When done properly, correction causes pain and many other symptoms to vanish.
Chiropractic and osteopathy helped thousands of people in the early 20th century in America. This led to a bitter battle with the allopaths or drug doctors, who viewed bone and tissue manipulation as competition. The allopathic trade organization and political arm, the AMA or American Medical Association, nearly drove chiropractic and osteopathy out of business using thug tactics and big money politics. They outlawed their schools, lied and denigrated their work, and used other methods to discredit and banish them.
Eventually, both the osteopaths and the chiropractors decided they needed their own licensing boards so that the allopaths would not stop them from practicing their trade. It took the chiropractors until 1974 to achieve licensing in all the American states!
The osteopaths decided to give up their manipulative work, for the most part, and just become licensed as allopathic doctors. Some of their excellent techniques are still taught at osteopathic medical schools, but not much, and most osteopaths do not offer manipulative therapy.
Manipulation techniques and development. Unlike most other healing arts, chiropractic or osteopathic manipulation are extremely compatible with development science. At times, they are absolutely needed for healing.
Also, development includes a very basic chiropractic or osteopathic routine done daily to keep the spine flexible called the Spinal Twist Procedure.
Nature-cure is a very old method of healing that uses only non-toxic methods to heal the body. One of its more famous practitioners was Hippocrates, a Greek physician who lived several thousand years ago.
Nature-cure applies good quality foods, mild herbs, and other natural methods such as hot and cold water (hydrotherapy), sunshine, fresh air and deep breathing, diet and lifestyle.
Methods to apply these include various diets, baths, enemas, douches, massage, manipulation, reflexology, oxygen therapies, sunbathing, and hot and cold applications to the body.
The concept is that one will not give poisonous remedies to heal disease. Instead, one seeks to change the environment around the body to make it healthier, and in this way the body heals itself.
Development borrows some procedures and products from this noble tradition. Development differs a lot from nature-cure, however, in the following ways:
1. Development science uses modern healing theory such as the stress theory of disease, cybernetic principles, chaos theory, and others. These are all twentieth century ideas.
It also uses all of modern biochemical, nutritional, and other medical sciences which were less available when nature-cure began.
2. Development science relies heavily on the concept of yang and yin taken from macrobiotics. It is an ancient idea that is not used much in Western medical or natural healing sciences.
3. Development uses hair tissue mineral analysis, another modern scientific innovation.
4. Development science does not use many herbs, as we find most of them to be somewhat toxic remedies.
5. Development science requires hair mineral testing for assessment of the body and to guide the design of programs. Unlike nature-cure, development science focuses on balancing the body in various ways, not just supplying natural items.
Nature-cure is somewhat popular in Europe, where people can go on a “spa vacation” to “take the cure”, as it is called. They rest a lot, eat fresh food, sit in the sun, bath in the mineral springs, have a massage and perhaps a colonic irrigation, and sit in the sauna or steam bath. They often come home refreshed, slimmer, and healthier.
Nature-cure never became as popular in the United States, although some hot spring resorts and the famous Battle Creek Sanitarium in Michigan flourished in America during the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
During the twentieth century, nature-cure was violently suppressed by the allopathic medical profession and drug companies, who viewed them as competition. The allopaths successfully shut down most of the mineral hot spring resorts and nature-cure hotels and sanitariums.
The best features of nature-cure:
1. Low toxicity.
3. An appreciation for the self-healing abilities of the body when given the right nourishment, warmth, and other conditions for healing.
4. Less of a remedy science and more of a systems approach.
Problems with nature-cure.
- Does not include balancing yin and yang or other aspects of body chemistry such as mineral levels.
- Does not include much of modern biochemistry and other newer sciences.
Some would say naturopathy is very similar to nature-cure. However, they are not the same.
Two branches. In America, some naturopaths are licensed, while another group of naturopaths are not state licensed. The licensed naturopaths attempt to drive the unlicensed ones out of business. This split is discussed below.
Toxicity. Naturopathy includes some non-toxic therapies such as baths, manipulation, and use of sunshine. However, today’s naturopathy is generally a remedy science that uses toxic therapies such as hormone replacement, chelation, IV vitamins, homeopathy, and some toxic herbs. Some licensed naturopaths also prescribe medical drugs!
Remedy science. Naturopathy, as generally practiced, is largely a remedy science. This means that they diagnose diseases and then prescribe remedies for them.
This is very different from development, which does not require diagnosis and does not use remedies much at all.
Please note this difference, as it may be confusing, at times, to realize that naturopathy is not at all similar to development science, although they may seem similar.
Problems with naturopathy today:
1. Often just a fancy, all-inclusive remedy science without a central theory of healing.
2. Much more toxic than development, although it is less toxic than allopathic medicine, in general.
The author recently learned that to attend the licensed naturopathic colleges in America, they require that all students be vaccinated! That is total hypocrisy, from a natural perspective. It tells me the licensed naturopathic profession has been seriously infiltrated by allopathic propaganda and lies.
The war between the licensed and unlicensed naturopaths in the USA. A battle currently rages in the state legislatures of the United States Of America for legal dominance between the licensed naturopaths and the unlicensed naturopaths.
At this time, naturopathic doctors have achieved licensing in some 20 states in America. When naturopathic licensing is brought to a state, one of their first items of business is to outlaw the older, traditional naturopaths and nature-cure doctors, whom they view as competition.
The licensed naturopaths are brutal and purely selfish, completely ignoring the needs of the American people. It is a standard abuse of licensing, which this website considers a bad system of regulating physicians and others. For details, read The Case Against Medical Licensing.
Licensed naturopaths and development. Few, if any licensed naturopaths offer development science at this time (2018). I hope someday this situation will change.
Homeopathy is a remedy science that uses medicines prepared in a special way so they contain very little chemical substances. Homeopathy is offered in the USA mainly by naturopaths and holistic medical doctors.
History. Homeopathy began in the early 1800s with the research of Samuel Hahnemann, a German physician (1755-1843). He noticed that very diluted, potentized doses of various herbs, minerals and other substances had interesting effects upon the human body. He developed a set of axioms about how the science works, and how to prepare the homeopathic medicines.
Homeopathic theory. Homeopathy depends upon the theory that disease is cured by remedies that produce in a healthy person similar symptoms as that of the complaint of the person.
This is an unusual idea. For example, if a healthy person takes a particular homeopathic remedy, it might produce nausea. This is called a “proving”. Once this is known, then if a person with nausea is given the same remedy, it may stop the nausea. This is the essence of the homeopathic concept, although there are some other principles.
Problems with homeopathy. Homeopathy is very appealing because the remedies are inexpensive and one does not have to change one’s diet or make other lifestyle changes to use it. However, it has serious problems, for which reason we never recommend homeopathy. The problems are:
1. The remedies are extremely yin. This is a very serious problem, though it is subtle. One or two uses won’t harm the body much, but repeated use weakens the body badly, even if the remedies cause symptomatic improvement.
2. In our view, the remedies are toxic in other ways. This is our experience. Yin is one type of toxin. In addition, toxins appear to build up in the frontal area and, at times, in other areas of the brain. They are very subtle toxins that are actually shapes. For details, see Shape Science.
3. It is a symptom-based or remedy science. This means that even if it causes symptomatic relief, it does not balance and strengthen the body, in contrast to development science.
4. Coffee, used extensively in development, will antidote many homeopathic remedies. As a result, coffee is not permitted by many homeopaths. This makes homeopathy incompatible with development science.
5. We now believe that the aggravations that occur with homeopathy are not the same as retracing that occurs with a development program. This is important because retracing is a key feature of a development program. Homeopathic aggravations are often much less intense and do not last as long.
Development is nothing less than the full unfolding of the potential of a human being. It goes far beyond healing the body and brain. To understand this better, please read Introduction To Development.
We formerly called this science nutritional balancing or mineral balancing. However, these terms are not inclusive enough, so we now use the term development science.
History. Development science is thousands of years old. Among the ancient researchers on earth were the ancient taoists who developed the theory of yin and yang forces in the body. They, in turn influenced the ancient acupuncturists and others.
Modern development science. Present-day development science updates the older methods using newer scientific tools and procedures. Among more modern scientists were Dr. Hans Selye, MD, who first proposed the stress theory of disease. Another modern pioneer was Dr. George Watson, who discovered the oxidation types.
Dr. Paul C. Eck (1925-1996) synthesized these and other ideas, and added the use of hair mineral testing to assess the body. He did not think of his work as development science, although he contributed much to the modern science of development.
More recent changes. Since Dr. Eck’s passing in 1996, we have changed the diets somewhat, made changes to the supplement programs, added detoxification and healing procedures, and learned more about hair mineral testing.
Many articles on this website detail these changes. Articles are all listed on the ‘Read Articles’ page of this website.
Features of development science:
1. Safer than most other healing methods, in our experience.
2. Effective for healing most conditions. Some, however, take up to a few years to heal.
3. More permanent healing than remedy approaches.
4. Preventive. It can even heal sub-clinical or latent conditions that do not yet present obvious symptoms.
5. Extremely good for chronic infections, and to remove metal and chemical toxicity from the body.
6. Causes development. This is its secrets, and the reason it is powerful and yet safe at the same time.
7. Trauma healing. It can undo many mental and physical traumas. This is an unusual benefit.
8. Retracing. This is a deep type of healing that occurs with very few healing arts.
Problems with development science:
1. Commitment. One needs to prepare good quality meals, rest adequately and take the time to do the healing procedures.
2. Retracing. During the program, one will, at times, develop temporary symptoms as one revisits old illnesses and other conditions in order to heal them deeply. Retracing is usually benign. However, occasionally it produces annoying or even scary temporary symptoms. For details, read Retracing.
4. Facing issues. Development requires healing mental and emotional issues and blockages, and some people do not want to look at these.
5. Need for supervision. Following a development program on your own is practically impossible, in our experience. We wish this were not so. However, supervision is needed to stay on track and avoid many difficulties.
POPULAR ORIENTAL HEALING SYSTEMS
This is a very ancient method of healing. It is an enormous and complex discipline that takes years and years to learn. It is somewhat similar to development in its principles. Let us explore this, as it is interesting that a 5,000 year old therapy is even somewhat similar to one that was developed less than 50 years ago:
Similarities between acupuncture and development science:
1. Balancing yin an yang.
2. Identifies the same patterns in the body, in many cases, although the names are often different.
3. Some of the products are similar, although acupuncture relies on herbs whereas development uses the newer vitamin and mineral products of Western nutritional science.
4. Uses a combination of diet, lifestyle, herbs or supplements and other procedures to balance the body.
Important differences between acupuncture and development:
1. Acupuncture uses the older herbs.
2. Diet is less critical in acupuncture.
3. Acupuncture uses needling of the meridian points. This is not part of development.
4. NB uses the hair mineral analysis, and coffee enema, foot reflexology, red lamp sauna, spinal twist and pushing down exercise. These are not part of acupuncture.
Acupuncture, in my experience, is very interesting, but not as effective today for many people. The herbs are somewhat toxic, and the needling does not necessarily more energy downward through the body, which is necessary. Therefore, we don’t usually recommend acupuncture and we don’t seem to need it.
This is another very ancient healing method that is still popular in India, in particular. Like acupuncture, it is a large, complex science. Like development science, Ayurveda involves metabolic typing, diets, herbs and some other practices.
A major concept in Ayurveda is to classify bodies as being one of three major metabolic types that are called pita, vatta and kapha. Once one’s type has been identified, specific foods, herbs and other procedures are recommended to balance the body.
In my experience of 35 years, Ayurveda is not nearly as helpful today as it perhaps once was, many thousands of years ago. Conditions on earth have changed recently, and the bodies are all much sicker and more yin than they were when Ayurveda was developed.
THE REMEDY PARADIGM VERSUS BALANCING THE BODY
To understand the history of health care, it is necessary to understand healing paradigms. A paradigm is a set of ideas, a way of viewing reality, or a pattern of how things really work in the world. The dominant paradigm of healing in the Western nations today may be called the diagnose-and-treat method. It requires that:
1. A health practitioner must first identify or diagnose a disease entity, a “constitution”, a constellation of symptoms, a syndrome, a diathesis or some other health condition.
2. Once the diagnosis is made, one or more remedies are applied to treat, cure, ameliorate, palliate or ideally to remove the disease, symptoms, condition, diathesis or other problem.
3. The process of applying the remedy is sometimes called prescribing.
It is very critical to understand this paradigm. As with most paradigms, it is all around us, so we often take it for granted. However, it is not the only paradigm of healing.
For example, the ancient science of acupuncture does not name diseases or concern itself much with symptoms. Instead, the practitioner identifies certain rather esoteric imbalances with names like damp heat, yin deficiency or yang rising. Then steps are taken to rebalance the body, rather than focus on curing or removing symptoms, conditions, diseases, syndromes, diatheses or the constitution.
In this paradigm, which is used in development science, symptoms go away by themselves when the deeper imbalances are corrected.
Development is also a whole-system approach to healing. This means that healing occurs because the program balances the body and thereby restores and increases the body’s level of adaptive or biochemical energy. Balancing is done by correcting certain mineral ratios, making the body more yang, nourishing the body properly, and more.
As the body’s energy level increases using development science, the body’s healing intent or teleology becomes more active, and healing occurs throughout the body. This causes symptoms to go away and it allows a much higher overall level of health or wellness.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A BIOENERGETIC METHOD OF HEALING AND ALL REMEDY METHODS OF HEALING
1. A total systems approach instead of a partial approach. Remedy methods are more specific. Development is not too concerned with symptoms at all. It is a general systems theory approach to healing. The idea is to correct the system, and all symptoms improve on their own.
2. Few “toxic side effects”. From a systems theory perspective, all remedies are somewhat toxic because they do not address the whole system of the body/mind and soul. In fact, it is not possible to remedy or correct just one part of an integrated system. Any remedy that addresses just one part of the total system will affect the whole system.
3. With development, the body corrects symptoms in its own order and its own timing. This is a critical concept. It can be frustrating at times, because the symptom one is most interested in correcting, such as fatigue, may not be the first symptom to go away because the body has different priorities.
For example, the teleology or healing intent of the body may decide that a hidden aneurism or a weak heart is more important to heal first, before a symptom of fatigue. Therefore, it can seem like healing is slower, although this is not really true. It is just occurring in a different order, and much of it is hidden from view.
In fact, this property of the bioenergetic approach makes it much more thorough and much safer than any remedy approach. This is because all remedy methods depend on the doctor’s and the client’s ability to assess the real problem, whereas with development this is much less important because the body decides which symptom or conditions to heal first. Its priorities for healing are usually far more accurate and appropriate than our guesswork, although it is not the case with cancer.
4. Deeper, and more complete healing of the body and brain. As stated above, healing is much deeper and more thorough with bioenergetics.
5. Much more is asked of the client. Bioenergetics requires much more client participation, self-discipline and understanding than most remedy approaches. The latter tend to be far more passive for the client. This is good in some ways. It also means that development will not be easy and that some, or perhaps many people will not want to do it at all.
6. Mental or spiritual development occurs only with development. Development causes a particular process to occur in the body called development that rarely, if ever, occurs with the use of remedies of any kind. This process extends life and boosts health in unusual ways, and is discussed in other articles on this website such as Introduction To Mental Or Spiritual Development.
A VERY BRIEF HISTORY OF THE WAR BETWEEN THE HEALING ARTS
Politics may seem like an unusual subject to be included in an article about methods of healing. However, it is very important to understand. Otherwise, one cannot appreciate why health care is so costly, and why the health of Western people is degenerating, even with lots of medical research, “wars on cancer”, and other heroic efforts to conquer disease.
Very briefly, for years Europe had a “guild system”, which mainly perpetuated the politically-correct allopathic method of healing. Only the children of doctors were permitted to study medicine and become doctors, essentially. The United States had a much more open and competitive health care marketplace throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, and into the early 20th century.
So, for example, until around 1910, the allopathic method of healing in the United States had to compete openly with nature cure, homeopathy, osteopathy, chiropractic, and other healing methods. Unlike the other healing arts, however, the allopaths began to organize politically, as early as 1847, to get rid of their competition. They used standard political methods such as lies and propaganda, bribes to state legislators, murder, extortion and other thuggish tactics to press their case. Slowly, they convinced the public and state legislators in the USA to pass state medical licensing laws that entrenched their doctors and basically made all other healing methods illegal in the United States.
They succeeded only too well, changing medical care from an open marketplace, driven by the consumer, to a cartel that today literally controls all of medical care, from medical education and hospital residencies, to laboratories, hospitals, clinics and to what doctors can and cannot say and do.
Their success has nothing to do with the effectiveness of their methods or service to the public. Instead, it has everything to do with political power and control of the mass media, control of the major medical journals, heavy advertising, and much more. This is as true today as it was over 100 years ago.
Although most doctors do not realize it, they are taught, coerced and manipulated by their training and licensing boards to use only drugs and surgery, for the most part. All other methods of healing such as diet, nutritional supplements, hydrotherapy, homeopathy, naturopathy, herbal medicine and other methods are largely absent from their schools, clinics, hospitals and their journals. They are literally in the dark when it comes to these other sciences. This is by design by those who would control the medical care system.
The public, as well, are horribly ignorant of the truth about nutrition, nutritional supplements, chiropractic and other healing methods that the allopaths do not support. Most people just accept the idea that allopathy is best because that is what they are told by the allopathically-controlled mass media. If you don’t believe me, just watch television for an hour or so and notice all the advertisements for drugs.