“Meat still not monitored for hormone residues”

U.S beef is heavily contaminated with natural or synthetic sex hormones. The hormones in past and current use include the natural estrogen, progesterone and testosterone, and the synthetic zeranol, trenbolone, and melengesterol. When beef cattle enter feedlots, pellets of these hormones are implanted under the ear skin, a process that is repeated at the midpoint of their 100-day pre-slaughter fattening period. These hormones increase carcass weight, adding over $80 extra profit per animal.

Also, and not surprisingly, but contrary to longstanding claims by the FDA and USDA, residues of these hormones in meat are up to 20-fold higher than normal. Still higher residues result from the not uncommon illegal practice of implantation directly into muscle. Furthermore, contrary to misleading assurances, meat is still not monitored for hormone residues.

“Hormone residues in meat linked to the escalating incidence of cancers”

Increased levels of sex hormones are linked to the escalating incidence of reproductive cancers in the U.S. since 1975, 60% for prostate, 59% for testis, and 10% for breast. Nevertheless, the FDA and USDA maintain that hormone residues in meat are within “normal levels,” while waiving any requirements for residue testing.

Following a single ear implant in steers of Synovex-S, a combination of estrogen and progesterone, residues of these hormones in meat were found to be up to 20-fold higher than normal. The amount of estradiol in two hamburgers eaten in one day by an 8-year-old boy could increase his total hormone levels by as much as 10%, particularly as young children have very low natural hormone levels. Not surprisingly, the incidence of childhood cancer has increased by 38% since 1975.

“Jeopardizing the health and safety of consumers of meat, milk and poultry”

These concerns are not new. As evidenced in a series of General Accountability Office investigations and Congressional hearings, FDA residue-tolerance programs and USDA inspections are in near total disarray, aggravated by brazen denials and cover-ups.

A January 1986 report, “Human Food Safety and the Regulation of Animal Drugs,” unanimously approved by the House Committee on Government Operations, concluded that “the FDA has consistently disregarded its responsibility – has repeatedly put what is perceives are interests of veterinarians and the livestock industry ahead of its legal obligation to protect consumers, thus jeopardizing the health and safety of consumers of meat, milk and poultry.

Based on these concerns, Europe banned imports of U.S. beef in 1989, and Japan followed up with its own ban in 2003. Before the ban, Japan was the most lucrative overseas market for American beef, importing more than $1.5 billion worth in 2002.

In this connection, it is well recognized that American women have about a five-fold greater risk of breast cancer than Japanese. However, as recently confirmed by studies of cancer rates in Los Angeles County, the most highly populated ethnically diverse county in the U.S., the low risk in Japanese women increases sharply in immigrants to the U.S. after one to two generations. This, and a wide range of other studies in migrant populations, are supportive of avoidable, dietary, and possibly other “Westernized” lifestyle, causes of breast cancer, particularly hormonal meat.

Although I am not necessarily encouraging anyone to eat meat (it is a personal choice), if you do eat meat, please read this. Like most of the goods in this country, our meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy products are now being mass produced. Today, most commercially available meats are factory farmed because it’s fast, convenient and more profitable. And if you are a meat eater, eating organic animal products is always better than eating regular, mass produced, factory-farmed feedlot animals. Unfortunately, even organic products can be from animals that are raised in confinement and fed grains. On the plus side, at least the feed doesn’t contain cost saving restaurant waste, animal byproducts, municipal garbage, bubble gum and poultry manure as it does in regular feedlots.

Switching from natural diet of grasses to grains:

Originally all cattle were grass-fed, which is what they were meant to eat–grasses and shrubs. Grazing animals such as cows, sheep, goats and bison possess a rumen, or a second stomach, which is like a fermentation tank. In this rumen, normal bacteria convert grasses, shrubs and plants into protein and fats. When you feed these “ruminants” grains, all sorts of problems occur. In particular, it makes their digestive tracts acidic and they develop “sub acute acidosis.” This results in the animals experiencing diarrhea and excessive salivation. The animals may also kick at their bellies, eat dirt and go off their feed. We also know that this acidic environment encourages the development of E. coli bacteria. This is why feedlot animals need to be given constant antibiotics and is one of the reasons why humans experience problematic bacteria resistant to antibiotics.

Switching ruminants from their natural diet of grasses to grains also lowers their nutritional value (see benefits of Grass-Fed Meats).When you choose grass-fed beef, lamb, bison or poultry, you’re eating nutritious and healthy meats, as nature intended.
A good resource is http://www.eatwild.com/. Remember if it doesn’t say grass-fed, you can assume it’s grain-fed.

The benefits of eating grass fed meat:

• Better for your health.
• No antibiotics, animal by-products, hormones or other drugs.
• Less fat (6-8 times less) and therefore fewer calories. Grass-fed beef often has the same amount of fat as skinless chicken breast.
• Less pro-inflammatory Omega-6 fatty acids.
• More anti-inflammatory Omega-3 fatty acids (2-5 times more than grain-fed cattle), because grass is high in Omega-3.
• More conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), another good fatty acid that reduces the risk of cancer, diabetes and obesity. The human body can’t produce CLA, but it can be obtained through foods such as whole milk, butter and beef. Studies show grass-fed cows have 500% more CLA in their milk than those that are fed silage.
• More vitamin E.
• Better for the environment. Less ground, air and water pollution.
• Better for the animals. More humane treatment of the animals.

When you choose products from pastured animals, you are eating the food that nature intended. You are also supporting small farmers, safeguarding the environment, promoting animal welfare, and eating food that is nutritious, wholesome and delicious.

Check out this animation movie about the meat you eat to our website link or www.themeatrix.com

1. What does grassfed mean?

The American Grassfed Association defines grassfed products from ruminants, including cattle, bison, goats and sheep, as those food products from animals that have eaten nothing but their mother’s milk and fresh grass or grass-type hay from birth to harvest – all their lives. For grassfed non-ruminants, including pigs and poultry, grass is a significant part of their diets, but not the entirety of their diets, since these animals need to consume grains. Many products have been, and continue to be, marketed as “grassfed”, when grass is only a part of their diet. This lack of standardization on grassfed products is just one of the reasons the American Grassfed Assocation is pushing hard for strict U.S. Department of Agriculture guides on grassfed marketing claims.

2. What kinds of meats are grassfed?

Virtually any air-breathing food animal can be raised partially or entirely on grass. The most common products are beef, bison, lamb, goat, pork, poultry, eggs and dairy (milk, butter and cheese).

3. What are the advantages of grassfed products?

A: Grassfed animal products have been shown to be higher in beta carotene (Vitamin A), conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), and Omega-3 fatty acids, which are important in reducing cholesterol, diabetes, cancer, high blood pressure and other life threatening diseases. These products are lower in fat, cholesterol and calories. In addition, the risk of infection by E. coli in these products in virtually eliminated.

4. What are the disadvantages of grassfed products?

A: A disadvantage for grassfed meat producers is that animals raised entirely on grass mature more slowly, lengthening the production time of grassfed products. A disadvantage for the consumer is that true grassfed products are not available in all the retail outlets, making it necessary for the consumer to find and purchase directly from a producer. Among the goals of the American Grassfed Assocation is to help consumers find grassfed products.

5. Where can I buy grassfed products?

A: Many consumers find it best to buy grassfed meats directly from the producer. Specialty grocery stores also carry them, and even mainstream supermarkets are beginning to carry these products. However, consumers need to be aware that there is not yet a standard for classifying a product as grassfed. [click here to go directly to our Producers Page]

http://www.americangrassfed.org/aga-producer-members/

6. How can I be certain the product is truly grassfed?

A: For now, the best way to ensure that the product is truly grassfed is to talk with with the rancher or farmer who raised the animal. The American Grassfed Association is working to establish a legal definition of exactly what constitutes grassfed and to allow only the products meeting the criteria to be so labeled. In the very near future, consumers will be able to purchase products from certified American Grassfed Association producers, which will be identified with the American Grassfed Association’s trademarked marketing logo.

It is very confusing, but here is what I understand of the complicated labeling of animal products

“100% GRASS FED” or “GRASS FED ONLY”

Means the meat should have been produced from animals that were fed only grass, hay and other non grain vegetation, for their entire lives and therefore, no grains and no animal by-products.

“GRASS FED”

Without the only or 100%, may mean that the animal ate grass for part of its life, but not its whole life. I recommend you contact the farmer or producer and ask whether the animals were also fed grains, animal by-products or rendered animal protein. Unlike the organic label, “grass fed” claims are not necessarily verified by an independent organization unless otherwise specified. Also there are no restrictions on the use of antibiotics or growth hormones. Because these standards are considered way too lenient by the American Grassfed Association, (http://www.americangrassfed.org/), they have decided to take matters into their own hands and set up an independent certification system.

“ORGANIC”

Organic labeled meat provides consumers with the assurance that meat came from a farm that prohibits using animal by-products or antibiotics or related drugs in the feed for farm animals. All food labeled “organic” must be verified by an independent organization. When organically raised animals become sick, they are treated with antibiotics but then do not receive the organic label. A third party certifies these standards. Problem here is, unless it also says grass fed, the animals have been grain fed.

“FREE-RANGE/FREE ROAMING”

These labels have been approved by the USDA for poultry that have been allowed access to the outdoors (though they may never actually go outdoors) but the claim implies nothing about the antibiotic use practices of the producer.

“NO ANTIBIOTICS ADDED/RAISED WITHOUT ANTIBIOTICS”

This label indicates that the animals have not been fed antibiotics at any point in their lives. Meat from sick animals treated with antibiotics cannot be sold under this label claim. Although the USDA approved the use of this claim, compliance is not certified by a third party.

“NATURAL/ALL-NATURAL”

The USDA defines a “natural” meat product as one that contain[s] no additives or preservatives or added color and is only minimally processed, although it does allow flavor injections. Meat labeled “natural” may or may not have been treated with antibiotics. It is not regulated and there are no national standards. But — it doesn’t mean naturally raised.

“NATURALLY RAISED”

Means “Livestock used for the production of meat and meat products have been raised entirely without growth promotants, antibiotics, and have never been fed mammalian or avian by-products.” Although this is an attempt to increase the standards for how the animals are fed, there is no consideration for their living conditions. In other words they could still be raised in feedlots.

“NO ANIMAL BY-PRODUCTS”

Means that this meat should have been produced from animals that were fed food without animal by-products. However, these claims are not necessarily verified by an independent organization unless otherwise specified e.g. accompanied by a USDA Verified Shield). Mad cow disease is known to pass from one animal to another through the use of animal by-products in animal feed. Certain labels indicate that animal by-products are not used in the feed that produced the meat. Therefore, meat carrying these labels is very low risk in terms of mad cow disease.

“CERTIFIED HUMANE RAISED AND HANDLED”

This label means that a producer has met the standards of Humane Farm Animal Care (HFAC), an independent inspection and verification agency. This label is particularly useful if you’re unable to verify a producer’s free-range claims on poultry or eggs. (The term free range is not regulated or standardized by the federal government.) HFAC has free-range requirements for producers that want to be certified humane.

The best thing is to try shop at local farmers’ markets whenever possible and ask the farmers how their meat is raised. Develop a relationship with your farmer, so you know exactly how he raises his animal. Supporting farmers who pasture feed their cattle and don’t give them antibiotics helps make the meat production system more sustainable and is much healthier for you.

If you can’t find a local farmer, a great resource is www.eatwild.com

Jared Koch is the author of Clean Plates NYC.

Eating and living healthier don’t have to be complicated or confusing, and they certainly don’t have to result in a boring, tasteless sacrifice. The following tips will provide you with a simple way of thinking about nutrition that will make it easy and even – more importantly – enjoyable.

At the foundation of my philosophy is the recognition that there is no single diet that will work for everyone. Instead, you just have to find which foods and eating habits are best for you. The following guidelines will put you on the right path to finding the perfect foods for you and your body. Remember, progress is more important than perfection. Shoot for eating well 80% of the time, and don’t beat yourself up about the other 20%.

Eat mostly VEGETABLES. Lots of green leafy ones (kale and swiss chard are two of my favorites!) and include a variety of different colors (carrots, squashes, broccoli, etc). Combine raw and cooked vegetables, shoot for local and organic, and don’t forget the ones from the sea! Seaweeds like kelp and nori are loaded with minerals.

Then have some NUTS AND SEEDS. Stick mostly to raw and unsalted ones for the most benefit.

Of course, remember to have FRUIT. Berries are best, and if possible, be sure to buy local and/or organic.

Depending on your body’s needs and preferences, eat an appropriate amount of GRAINS (mostly whole, low or no gluten – sprouted and sourdough breads are best), BEANS (soak ‘em first, low amounts or no processed soy) and ANIMAL PRODUCTS (look for pasture-raised, grass-fed, free-range, organic, antibiotic and hormone-free, wild seafood, and little or no dairy).

Use high-quality OILS (coconut for cooking and raw olive and/or flax for dressings), SALTS (preferably from the sea or pink Himalayan crystal) and lots of HERBS and SPICES. Not only do they stimulate your taste buds, but many, like garlic, ginger, cayenne, turmeric, cinnamon and rosemary are touted for their healing properties.

Reduce your intake of sugar, alcohol, caffeine and processed, chemicalized, artificially-flavored or preserved foods.

Drink mostly pure WATER and TEA (especially green).

Satisfy your sweet tooth. If fruit isn’t enough, use natural sweeteners (in moderation) such as raw honey, palm sugar – you’ll be hearing more about it – maple syrup, or agave nectar.

Nutrition is more than food. EVERYTHING YOU CONSUME MATTERS.

Be mindful of the relationships you keep, the books, magazines and internet sites you read, the movies and TV you watch, and the music you listen to.

EXERCISE and move your body often. Be exposed often to FRESH AIR and the SUN —even in the winter.

SLEEP well. Going to bed and getting up at the same time consistently is best. And shoot for between 6-8 hours, not more and not less. This could be the most important factor for good health.

MEDITATE! You’ll be surprised by the results. Make a difference. Laugh and smile, often. And most importantly: ENJOY your relationships. ENJOY your work. ENJOY and appreciate life.

As I said in my previous blog, having a sugar addiction is like having a drug addiction, it is very hard to overcome. Having a good plan and being prepared is essential. Here are some tips I have found to be helpful.

1. Have a breakfast of protein, fat and phytonutrients to start your day off right. The breakfast smoothies in my book Revive are ideal for this. The typical breakfast full of carbs and sugary or starchy foods is the worst thing you can do for sugar cravings as you’ll have them all day. Having a good breakfast is essential to prevent sugar cravings
2. Eat regularly. Eat three meals and two snacks a day. For many people, if they don’t eat regularly, their blood sugar levels drop, they feel hungry and are more likely to crave sweet sugary snacks.
3. Take L-Glutamine, 100-300mg every couple of hours as necessary. It often relieves sugar cravings as the brain uses it for fuel.
4. Distract yourself, go for a walk, best would be to go for a walk in nature if possible, do some push ups. Cravings usually last for maximum 10-20 minutes and then pass. If you can manage to distract yourself with something else, it often passes. The more often you do this, the easier it gets and the cravings get easier to deal with.
5. Have a piece of fruit. If you give in to your cravings, have a piece of fruit, it should satisfy a sweet craving and is much healthier.
6. Drink lots of water. Sometimes drinking water or selzer water can help with the sugar cravings
7. Keep sugary snacks out of your house and office if possible. Its difficult to snack on things that aren’t there!
8. Be open to explore the emotional issues around your sugar addiction.

How do you deal with your sugar cravings? Have you found something that really works for you? Please share …

Having been a serious sugar addict and still struggling with my “addiction”, I have always found it strange that the medical profession does not recognize this problem. I would say the majority of my patients are sugar addicts too, although most only become aware of it when they try to stop it. So far all of us who have experienced the cravings and withdrawals when we stop, it is nice to know there are studies now documenting this, albeit in rats.

A Princeton University scientist, Professor Bart Hoebel and his team have been studying signs of sugar addiction in rats for years. The stages of addiction, as defined by the American Psychiatric Association, include bingeing, withdrawal and craving. Until now, the rats had met two of the elements of addiction, bingeing and withdrawal. Their most recent experiment showed craving and relapse as well, critical components of addiction, to complete the picture. In other words, excess sugar leads to not only bingeing and withdrawal but a craving for sweets as well.

They recently presented this new evidence at the 2008 annual meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, demonstrating that sugar can be an addictive substance, similar to many addictive drugs.

And a study out of France, presented at the 2007 annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience, showed that when rats were given the choice between water sweetened with saccharin and intravenous cocaine, 94% chose the saccharin water. The same preference was also observed when the water was sweetened with sucrose (sugar), the rats overwhelmingly chose the sugar water. When the rats were offered larger doses of cocaine, it did not alter their preference for the saccharin or sugar water. In other words, intense sweetness was more rewarding to the brain than cocaine.

The authors concluded that in most mammals, including rats and humans, sweet receptors are not adapted to high concentrations of “sweets”. The excessive stimulation of these receptors by the sugar-rich diets in today’s societies generate reward signals in the brain, with the potential to override self-control mechanisms and thus lead to addiction.

For most of us, sugar is a symbol of love and nurturance. As infants, our first food is lactose, or milk sugar. As we leave the breast of our mothers, they continue to “nurture” us with sugar treats, which become a reward system. This leads to being conditioned to need something sweet to feel complete or satisfied. Sugar is the first addiction for almost everyone with addictions later in life.

And finally, remember that if foods that are high in sugars are used only as occasional ‘treats’ in the diet and not as a main component of our diet…that is fine.

What are the occasional “treats” that you eat? And do you find it hard to keep it occasional? Tell me and I’ll try to guide you through some simple tips and tricks!

Here is a great lecture from UCSF’s Robert Lustig who specializes in child obesity. He basically discusses/shows how fructose is just like alcohol with its toxicity. It is long but a brilliant explanation of why sugar and high fructose corn syrup is such a problem!

As I discussed in my earlier post, I do not believe there is a good reason to drink milk. This is why I think it could be detrimental to your health.

1. Dairy cows are fed the wrong food, which not only changes the nature of the milk but causes health problems for the cows. They are fed soy, corn, cottonseed meal or other commercial feeds, which contain all sorts of things including chicken manure and citrus peel cake, laced with pesticides. These foods are not appropriate for cows, who are ruminants and should be feeding on green grass in the spring, summer and fall and on green feed, silage, hay and root vegetables in the winter. Unfortunately most dairy cows are kept in confinement, given antibiotics and hormones, and never see green grass their entire lives.
2. Then the milk is pasteurized. Pasteurization is the process of heating a liquid to a high enough temperature to kill certain bacteria and disable certain enzymes. It destroys enzymes, vitamins, denatures fragile milk proteins, kills beneficial bacteria and promotes pathogens. Even calves fed pasteurized milk do poorly and many die before maturity. Pasteurization was instituted in the 1920s to combat TB, infant diarrhea, undulant fever and other diseases caused by poor animal nutrition and dirty production methods. But times have changed and modern stainless steel tanks, milking machines, refrigerated trucks and inspection methods make pasteurization absolutely unnecessary for public protection.
3. In some cases, milk is ultra-pasteurized to get rid of heat-resistant bacteria and give it a longer shelf life. Ultra high temperature pasteurization is a process that takes milk from a chilled temperature to above the boiling point in less than two seconds. This process is utilized for the boxed milks that can be kept at room temperature
4. To make matters worse, milk is homogenized. Homogenization is a process that breaks down butterfat globules so they do not rise to the top. Homogenized milk is harder to digest, so proteins that would normally be digested in the stomach are not broken down and instead are absorbed into the bloodstream. Often the body reacts to these “foreign proteins” by triggering the immune system, causing inflammation. It can even trigger auto-immune problems. Homogenized milk has also been linked to heart disease probably because of the fat globules that are dispersed by the process.
5. In addition to being chemically altered into something that hard to digest and causes problems, today’s milk usually contains steroids, antibiotics, pesticides from treated grains, bacteria from infected animals, and genetically engineered growth hormones.

So if you do drink milk, I suggest you look for pure raw milk from grass fed cows (which is hard to get in most states unfortunately), because it may not be the milk per se, but how milk is chemically altered that causes the problems.

Anyone who has taken a painkiller certainly knows that there is a big difference between temporary relief and real healing.  Even though a person who takes a painkiller may not consciously feel pain, it is widely understood that this relief does not necessarily mean that a “cure” or a “healing” has occurred.

And yet, it is surprising how many people think that various conventional drugs have performed some type of miracle just because they provided short-term relief of pain or discomfort.  Little do many people know that when a drug “works,” this may be the “bad news.” It may be that the drug works by suppressing the disease, thereby creating a much more serious physical and/or mental disease.

Although antibiotics and select other drugs may be an exception to this general observation, getting rid of an infection will not influence the immune factors that led the person to be susceptible to infection in the first place, and in fact, antibiotics are known to disrupt one’s inner ecology, disturb assimilation of nutrients, and even tend to make the person more susceptible to new infection (a future blog will deal more directly with this issue).

Painkillers, on the other hand, may provide great reduction in pain, but this may result in the person continuing to walk on that injured ankle and cause increased injury.  The person with arthritis, as another example, may continually take one or more painkilling drugs that provide some relief but these drugs also create their own tolerance, addiction, or pathology, usually leading to much more serious health problems.

A smart person might consider taking a conventional drug that provides temporary blessed relief while concurrently seeking some more deep treatment that nourishes, nurtures, or augments the body’s own defenses.  A problem, however, is created when a sick person frequently relies upon a drug to provide temporary relief and does not seek a real, more profound healing.

Differentiating Real Healing from Suppression of Disease

When a person experiences relief from any treatment, conventional or alternative, one should not necessarily assume that a real healing has occurred.  While it is possible that the person may really have been healed, it may also mean:

• the symptoms went away on their own, and the treatment had nothing to do with it.
• the treatment palliated the symptoms, providing short-term relief but resulted in the recurrence of symptoms in the near future.
• the treatment “worked” by suppressed the person’s symptoms or his/her own immune and defense system, thereby pushing the disease deeper into body. Although suppression of symptoms may cause them to disappear, they tend to be replaced, sooner or later, with more serious, deeper symptoms that are more discomforting and potentially dangerous.

Homeopaths and naturopaths both assert that there is a big difference between real healing, palliation of symptoms, and suppression of disease, even though each of these results may initially seem to be the same.

What people don’t usually understand is that there may be a danger in the frequent or recurrent application of treatments that suppress symptoms.  The concept of suppressing symptoms is well accepted and understood in psychology.  It is commonly observed when a person suppresses his or her emotions, such actions tend to push the emotional turmoil deeper, leading the person to explode at some future time, often at people who are not directly related to the origin of the person’s problem.

While people may be familiar with the problems associated with the suppression of emotions, people are generally not familiar with the possibility that many conventional medical treatments can suppress their physical symptoms, driving the disease deeper into the person. And yet, suppression of disease is so commonplace in today’s medical treatment that it is virtually ignored.

Doctors and drug companies tend to minimize the real problems of suppressing the disease process by referring to the “side effects” of a drug.  And yet, pharmacologists commonly note that the determining a drug’s “effects” and its “side effects” are completely arbitrary.  They are both the direct effect of the drug upon the human body.

Ironically, many conventional drugs are touted specifically for their ability to “suppress” symptoms…or even suppress the body’s own immune system.  Ultimately, pushing the disease deeper into the person is the result of using pharmacological agents that are explicitly prescribed for their ability to control or inhibit symptoms that are the natural defensive functions of the body.  Suppression of disease may provide the semblance of benefit (or at least short-term benefit), but ultimately may make the person much sicker.  Such suppression of the disease process may lead to increased chronic disease, immune dysfunction, and mental illness, all of which we are seeing together in epidemic proportions.

Understanding the Healing Process from a Whole Systems Perspective

The father of American homeopathy was a German physician named Constantine Hering, MD (1800-1880).  Hering was a respected conventional physician who was hired by a publisher to write a book critical of homeopathy, and in his research on the topic, he became convinced of its efficacy.  After many years of practicing homeopathy, he observed that people go through a specific healing process after being given the correct homeopathic medicine. He developed guidelines in which to determine when a real healing is taking place. These guidelines have been called “Hering’s laws of cure,” but some homeopaths prefer to call them “Hering’s guidelines of cure.”

To understand these guidelines, it is first useful to know that homeopaths carefully evaluate the evolution of a person’s physical, emotional, and mental/spiritual symptoms.  Homeopaths consider mental/spiritual symptoms to be deepest to the core of a person’s being for they represent the will, the ego, the sense of security that the person feels, and the person’s overall state of consciousness.  Homeopaths today wonder if the immune system’s important ability to identify “self” from “non-self” is dynamically connected to a person’s mental/spiritual state of health, thereby linking mind and body health.  The emotional symptoms are external to the mental/spiritual level of the person because imbalances in the deeper level will create increased propensities to various fears, angers, depressive states, and other emotions. The physical symptoms are the most outer manifestation of the person, though every level can and will influence the other.

Also, each level has certain symptoms that have more or less influence on a person’s overall health.  For instance, a person’s asthma will be deeper than his or her skin rash, a person’s fear of death will be deeper than his or her irritability, and a person’s loss of self esteem will be deeper than a subtle reduction in memory. Likewise, when comparing symptoms on different levels, a person’s heart disease will more profoundly affect his or her health than a difficulty in concentration experienced on the mental/spiritual level.

In light of these levels of the human being and the degrees of intensity to which a symptom impairs a person’s ability to live, Hering found that healing progresses:

· From within to without (from the deepest part of our being to the most external);

· From the most recent disease back in time to previous ones (a reversion of the disease process);

· From the top of the body to the bottom of the body.

Ultimately, basic concepts of survival and evolution are at the heart of this understanding of the defenses of the body.  The human body can and will defend its most vital functions first before defending its more superficial functions.

Homeopaths observe that a truly effective therapy sometimes elicits a temporary exacerbation of certain symptoms, usually in the superficial ones or sometimes ones that the person had many years previously. Homeopaths assert that a true healing is taking place when a person’s present symptoms are more superficial than previous ones.  One of the reasons that homeopaths and their patients have come to believe that homeopathic medicines are not simply placeboes is their observations that some symptoms tend to increase in the process of a curative response (healing from within to without…and the above other guidelines).

This “externalization” of symptoms is commonly observed by homeopaths who witness that approximately 20-30 percent of their patients with a chronic illness tend to experience skin symptoms, nasal or bronchial discharges, diarrhea, early menstruation with clots, profuse perspiration, or some other externalization of the disease process after an effective homeopathic treatment is provided.

On the other hand, if and when a person takes a conventional drug and his or her symptoms disappear but new ones that are more serious develop, this result suggests that the treatment has suppressed the person’s condition and has made them worse. Unknown to most physicians and patients, people undergoing conventional medical treatment are commonly having their disease suppressed. Homeopaths assert that one of the reasons that there is increased mental disease and increased chronic disease at earlier and earlier ages is because of effective suppression of the disease process by conventional medical treatment.

Distinct from methods that suppress disease are those that help disease express and externalize itself.  Homeopathy’s use of the principle of similars (using medicines bases on their ability to CAUSE the similar symptoms that the sick person is experiencing) is one important safeguard against disease suppression because it mimics the wisdom of the body rather than suppresses its symptoms.

I like to call homeopathy a type of “medical biomimicry” because a homeopathic medicine is chosen for its ability to mimic the symptoms that the sick person is experiencing.  Because there is a certain wisdom to the bodymind, mimicking this wisdom is a good way to elicit a real healing.