Homicidal Incompetence!

Homicidal Incompetence In The Alzheimer’s Dementia Medical World is killing millions of people every year.

Today I’m “grinding my axe”.

I’m not anti-doctor and am in awe of the huge advances constantly happening in the medical world. The Covid 19 vaccination program is a shining example of what modern medicine is capable of. The Alzheimers’s medical world is the antithesis of the Covid 19 story, it’s still where it was in 1906 when Dr Alzheimer first described the condition. The condition progresses just as it did in 1906, excepting advances in palliative care. All interventions to slow or reverse Alzheimer’s symptoms are ineffective.

The biggest obstacle to successfully treating Alzheimer’s is the mainstream Alzheimer’s medical world, it’s a tragedy and a disgrace for which the participants should be deeply ashamed.

Ann had a rehabilitation assessment 4 weeks ago and we’re awaiting the outcome, it’s our second try, the first being two years ago. The last assessment was unsuccessful despite clear evidence that she was recovering against all expectations, desperately in need of rehabilitation to protect existing physical and cognitive function and maximise her chances of regaining lost abilities.

I won’t examine the clear failures by the medical specialists to meet their ethical and legal obligations to Ann, that’s a story for another day.

What I am addressing today is my interpretation of why the Alzheimer’s medical world, despite it’s miserable failure rate, will not pay attention to the compelling evidence that Alzheimer’s is treatable, their mainstream methodology is useless and likely to stay that way. Their ignorance is killing millions of people every year.

I completed a science degree with a major in psychology during which I studied the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is an attempt to explain why seemingly rational people maintain irrational positions in the face of clear evidence otherwise. In my latest book I talk about folk predicting the end of the world at a certain date, the predicted date rolls around and life goes on. Rational thinking would suggest the whole proposition was false and these folk could return to normal life. This doesn’t happen, the date is shifted and the predictions broadcast with increased fervour. Why is this? Cognitive dissonance theory suggests that to accept the world isn’t ending means you also have to accept that you were wrong which can quickly lead to a number of uncomfortable assumptions about your intelligence and gullibility.

Cognitive dissonance in its extreme can lead to “perfectly nice” people doing terrible things. History is replete with examples of people carrying out shocking crimes then going home to cuddle their kids and pat the dog.

In the Alzheimer’s medical world we have a combination of both factors, irrational beliefs and nice people doing nasty things:

• hundreds of Alzheimer’s drug trials have produced a nil result. Despite billions spent and over 99% of trials being abandoned before completion, these folk haven’t made the logical connection: “perhaps our base assumption (amyloid cascade hypothesis) is wrong?” Instead they pursue this hopeless quest with increased fervour with yet another “a cure is just around the corner” futile project. You’ll see the headlines popping up as these folk attempt justification of their failed research or chase funding for the next expensive time-wasting exercise.

• These nice people, all the folk who have put Ann’s life in danger through their incompetence were nice, have a conundrum on their hands. They went into medicine to help people and facing the fact that their patients are guaranteed a lingering death owing to their incompetence, is a bitter pill to swallow. Easier to believe that you’re on the right track and doing the best that can be done for your patients, despite this being illogical.

We could view this cognitive dissonance as benign, but it’s mortally dangerous for Alzheimer’s patients. As we await the outcome of Ann’s rehabilitation assessment, I worry about her past specialists’ opinions denying her the care she needs. The current specialist is referring to past specialists who in one case nearly killed her (twice) and the other case, denied her rehabilitation in a clear attempt to sweep Ann’s recovery under the medical rug. Ann presents the Alzheimer’s establishment with an uncomfortable truth, Alzheimer’s is treatable and they don’t know what they’re doing. Ann is lucky that I’m so obstinate, denial of her rehabilitation needs will lead to some very uncomfortable times for her past medicos. This is a promise I make for her sake and the many others who don’t have a voice and Ann will get her rehabilitation program.

Cognitive dissonance can also make life dangerous for medical practitioners who dare to follow the science and produce outcomes which highlight the inadequacies of their colleagues. A famous example was that of Dr Semmelweiss during 1847 in a Vienna obstetrics facility. In one month Semmelweiss caused postnatal fatalities in birthmothers to drop by 90%, this by the simple expedient of having attending doctors wash their hands. The response of the medical profession? He was drummed out of the profession, certified insane under suspicious circumstances and died in an asylum. It took the medical profession forty years to finally adopt effective hygiene practices. Dr Bredesen faces the same resistance despite hundreds of published papers and outstanding results for his Alzheimer’s patients. We have a recent example in our country of an oncologist who had the temerity to merge lifestyle medicine with conventional medical practice and produce profession-leading levels of cancer remission, she’s being forced out of the profession.

The point of all this? Kick your Alzheimer’s doctor off his or her pedestal, they’re useless in most cases. There will never be an effective Alzheimer’s drug, it’s like trying to create a pill to cure illness, no amount of hopeful blather from your Alzheimer’s specialist will change this. If you hear the term “randomised controlled trials” in an Alzheimer’s context, it’s telling you the speaker does not understand Alzheimer’s. I’ll examine what is happening in the real world of Alzheimer’s research another time. I’ll also tell you where randomised controlled trials do have a place in treating Alzheimer’s.

Another topic coming: ‘terrain’ theory versus germ theory and its effect on modern medicine’s inability to effectively treat chronic complex medical conditions.

Kia Kaha! (Stay Strong)

Peter