People’s vs. Corporate Medicine

My videos have not always been considered completely politcally correct, socially acceptable or even in good taste.

In order to give my lecture, “The Supramolecular Chemistry of the Homeopathic Remedy” at the Cavendish laboratory at Cambridge, England,  I had to change the title of this video from “Homeopathy, the Jew of Modern Medicine” to what it is now.

Lately I’ve come to think that maybe I’m not as smart as I used to think. But gee whiz, these people who try to pass off skepticism for intelligence are really stupid.

It seems to me like the same kind of mentality of people who used to burn witches at the stake.

It’s not just the blatant hypocrisy that amazes me, its the unwillingness or inability  to challenge it.

It makes me wonder, ‘”what is it I don’t see about myself?” It’s not that I don’t have a lot of objectors, critics and bashers who follow me around, but usually they don’t have anything really constructive to say. It’s mostly just nasty name calling.

Now I got all the LGBT’s hating me.

I’m starting to run out of people to piss off.

Gotta be a reason for it . .

John Benneth, Homeopath
503 819 7777

Follow JBennethJournal on Twitter


5 comments on “People’s vs. Corporate Medicine

  1. […] Steven commented on People’s vs. Corporate Medicine […]


  2. Steven says:

    Since you’re attacking Dr. Novella I thought you and your readership would appreciate what he said about this self-same video of yours last year.


  3. Steven says:

    There’s nothing left to discuss. The science has been settled and Homeopathy doesn’t make the cut. This is why we’ve left it.

    Goodbye John, you and Homeopathy will fade from memory despite all of your efforts. Homeopaths are quickly becoming the new flat-earthers.


  4. Kaviraj says:

    You might do well with a nice expose of Pharmaceutical quackery that passes for evidence-based.

    We then see this:

    and this:

    And the recent GSK settlement for $3 Billion because of fraud, deceptive illegal advertising and death of too many people.

    Evidence-based medicine? Yes!
    The evidence base is death and iatrogenesis and that is all they have. So let us piss off Big Pharma a little more and show how few clothes the emperor really has!

    Such as the amounts of dead people from pharmaceutical quackery in the US is greater than cancer and heart disease combined – it stands at one million each and every year.

    Statistically, 16% of the population is sick at any one time. Of these, only the clients of alternative medicine have shorter periods of disease and are healthier and live longer on an all-over basis.
    Of those that use conventional medicine from Big Pharma, many end up taking increasing amounts of medicine to combat the effects of the previous medicine, which was prescribed for the effects of the previous, ad-infinitum, all the way to the one for the original complaint and do not feel any better.

    lets us talk about the 8% believable reports they can produce, because in 92% of all reports, the placebo is not even mentioned, which makes the report useless, or if so, it is not a placebo and two medicines are compared against each other. That is a biased test.

    Let us talk about the only 11% of proof of effectiveness on the disease, apart from producing side effects. Then we see that the evidence is death, and anecdotal for all other parameters, in collusion with the regulators, who approve such crap on such paucity of real evidence.

    Pharmaceutical quackery is precisely engaed in doing what they accuse the homoeopaths of. Those poor skeptics will never be able to wrap their heads or lies around this. Meanwhile, we have 200 years of unrivaled success with the same thoroughly tested medicines and are in little need to change it very much.


  5. Evan McCarvill says:

    You cite some good scientific evidence around the Homeopathy issue. I’ve found your blogs to be helpful in that regard.

    I just think you shoot yourself in the foot, when assert your unmitigated political opinions that sometimes offend more than just the pseudoskeptics. When I first discovered you, it was refreshing to hear an aggressive stance in favor of homeopathy, rather than just those opinions that are blindly against it. However, I think it’s important to remember why no thinking person cares to listen to opinionated pseudoskeptics. They have no apparent capacity for critical self-inquiry, and no ability to meet those who differ from them on equal, respectful grounds.

    It’s not good in the long run for Homeopathy defenders to embody that. It’s the kind of willfull ignorance we’re trying to dispel.


What do you think? Question? Answer? Please comment. Your thoughful reply will be appreciated

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s