It was never the purpose or intention of these essays to discuss ANY SPECIFIC diseases. Most could rightly be considered merely symptoms of a more basic "disease" ---the body's failure to repair, maintain and energize itself adequately as described in Part 9. "Unconventional Concepts of Illness & Health You May or May Not Have Considered" .

But since this particular "dis - - ease" has become such a polarizing issue both politically and "religiously" that nobody seems to be listening to anybody, and since truly natural health and healing is not on EITHER side but IS often categorized in the minds of many as part of the DO-NOTHING crowd, there appears to be some widely-overlooked science that BOTH groups really need to stop and listen to and think about.

FIRST--- "natural healing" is NOT about DOING NOTHING. NOR is it just replacing so-called "big pharma" with supposedly safer, "natural medicine" ---as in so-called "folk healing". Truly-natural health and healing is not about ANY kind of medicine. It's an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CONCEPT and OBJECTIVE; and that is to physically and biologically (not chemically and pharmaceutically) support and maximize the entire body's OWN NATURAL, INTERNAL, BUILT-IN day-to-day self-cleaning, self-repairing functions ---primarily by SUPPLYING it with the quality "raw materials" it needs to do that work properly (the biological/nutritional equivalent of fuel, cleaning supplies and building-materials), and PROTECTING it from as many HARMFUL substances and conditions as humanly possible. A full and complete practical application of these principles would make "medicine" NOT ONLY unneeded, but fundamentally harmful itself. (Remember, most medicine is "controlled" ---by prescription only--- BECAUSE it is dangerous stuff.) But, don't assume "natural" healing is some fantasy that could never heal or prevent "disease" just because it sounds "too simple". It's actually the only TRUE healing there ever is --- with OR without medicine --- and is usually accomplished IN SPITE OF any OUTSIDE healing efforts more than BECAUSE of them. It's the prevailing culture's strongly-held preconceived notions of what is "proper" or "the right way to live" that suppresses good health and makes healing complicated.

Part 3."Is It Safe?" briefly explained the FUNCTIONAL difference. (Link opens to that point in a new window if you missed it or need a review.) For those who object, all-righteously, before even listening to the facts, that "life is sacred" ---and for those who ARE interested in the facts--- the CONCEPT difference follows:

The so-called "civilized" world seems to have the idea that life is an accident, and that our supposedly highly intelligent society must sift through the "rubble" and try to bring some sort of order to the "chaos"; when, actually, life must have been highly organized when it began, since reliable scientific evidence (in contrast to most pseudo-scientific speculation) indicates that life cannot exist for any useful, sustainable period of time any other way.

Although "natural science" marvels at the order and "wisdom" in "nature", so-called "civilization" seems obsessed with controlling "nature" as if it were demented, remodeling it as if it were a blunder, or even conquering it as if it were an enemy. Technology becomes the only "science" that matters. (Ah, well, that's where the money, power and prestige is, isn't it?:) Unfettered, non-commercialized scientific research indicates, however, that the real needs for long-term TRUE QUALITY of human life are: (1) UNPROCESSED food IN IT'S NATURAL STATE, (2) Avoiding all contact with chemical compounds that were NOT ALREADY put together in "nature" (along with a few that were) and (3) Learning better ways of COOPERATING with "nature" rather than trying to refine, refashion or remodel the earth and it's "furnishings" and other resources.

Of course, many people agree ---abstractly--- that human activity is ruining the earth. But real life, in the natural world, unchanged by human intervention, has long been seen by "polite society" as UN-civilized, even barbaric. Granted, it's far more momentarily convenient (as well as socially acceptable) to take a vaccine or other medicine and go on living one's customary "civilized", refined, self-indulgent lifestyle as if IT had made no contribution to the problem and each illness or disease were a separate, unrelated issue that "just happened" or was "caught" from someone else. The meticulous-design evidence strongly suggests, however, that in the human body, most illnesses ARE related and ALL the elements of truly natural health are connected and inter-dependent. It's a sort of "package deal". Not meaning there's no room for individual tastes and preferences. There's LOTS of variety in nature. But WE REALLY need to cooperate with IT and try diligently to shake this deeply held egocentric feeling that modern "civilization" is somehow smarter than "nature". If life really is "sacred", as medicine's advocates are prone to retort, then DON'T TAMPER with it! Of course, civilization's "refined" self-pleasing convenient-but-shortsighted physical/material lifestyle could not exist WITHOUT remodeling "nature", could it? ---A sharp contrast from the "three basic needs" for TRUE quality-of-life described above.

SECOND--- Medicine is NOT the only "savior" and protector or the only "scientific" healing method. In fact ----are you sitting down?---- it is not always even PROVEN truly scientific at all!

You likely recognize, however, that TRUE HEALTH does not come from something you TAKE. It's something you BUILD or CULTIVATE over many years. And those who have spent a lifetime carefully and consistently doing just that in harmony with the natural, life-respecting "3-basic-needs" briefly outlined above (and who therefore know from personal experience how well it works) are not about to risk compromising the PROTECTION that comes from THAT extensive "investment" just to be "socially acceptable". "Life is sacred"! Remember? You surely know that many drugs are NOT compatible with a number of other drugs. Are you also aware that many are medically recognized as incompatible with certain simple, natural, "healing" foods? Ask any caring, knowledgeable pharmacist. Or see Part 8. "Is It For YOU?" for one classic example.

Interestingly, according to news reports, the three Covid-19 vaccines (and the oral drug being developed as of this writing) have the same basic objective ---keep the virus from replicating! But according to information on CDC's website, each goes about it by a somewhat different method. Does that make ONE the ONLY right way while all others are "the work of the Devil"? If statistics indicate a certain method "works" for the majority of people, does that automatically make it the BEST one for EVERYBODY? Then think about this: The LARGER objective of the natural-healing way of life accomplishes the above NARROW objective AND MORE by still another method. It deprives the virus of the material IT uses to replicate and provides the body with the "raw materials" IT needs to dispose of the virus as the biological refuse that it is. And it was already doing that long before coronavirus was a word or its vaccines were even thought about. No, it isn't foolproof any more than vaccines or other medicines are 100% effective or risk-free. But it DOES work ---extremely effectively--- when you LIVE the method.

THIRD--- Truly natural healing is NOT "prompt, temporary relief"; NOR is it merely psychosomatic. Sure, it works more effectively the more committed and focused you are. Yet, given time and constancy, it works whether you believe in it or not ---and whether you follow it willingly or (as in some "less civilized" countries) you have no choice. The latter situation shows up in the below-cited statistics reported by Johns Hopkins Univerity School of Medicine and United Nations World Health Organization that reveal a PATTERN very similar to that of the "systemic" diseases [from dental caries to heart-disease, stroke, cancer and more] that were studied extensively in similar statistical-occurance manner the past century and shown to be primarily "diseases of civilization".

Neither study was presented in a manner to PROVE anything; simply as information. But if you apply only a basic geographic/demographic knowledge of the world, the following pattern emerges: The FEWEST Covid-19 deaths COMPARED TO POPULATION were reported by the countries with the LEAST access to the processed, "refined" (dead- and-embalmed) foods, toxic chemicals and medicines of the so-called "civilized" world. Granted, the geographic isolation of parts of those countries may have hindered both "transmission" and accurate reporting. But from a FIFTH? to a TENTH? the PER-CAPITA death rate of the most "civilized" countries??!!!

Yes, all of this is "heresy" to the "civilized" world, just as Galileo's ego-shattering discovery in the 15th Century that the earth is NOT the center of the universe was heresy to those in power at that time. But it isn't necessary for others to believe it for it to work; any more than all Europe needed to believe the earth to be a sphere when "Columbus sailed the ocean blue, In fourteen hundred ninety-two". The outstanding success experienced by the individuals who manage to personally practice truly-natural healing strongly indicates that they are treating life as MUCH MORE SACRED than so-called civilization is. They're NOT DOING NOTHING. They're doing MUCH MORE than traditional "civilized" medicine is. Now, surely, that does NOT make them a menace to society ---unless, of course, society is insecure in it's convictions.