NATURE CURE FROM THE INSIDE by JAMES C. THOMSON ( A new approach to cancer by James Thomson )

NATURE CURE FROM THE INSIDE THE WHY OF CHRONIC DISEASE WITH MANY CASE HISTORIES AND HOME TREATMENTS BY JAMES C. THOMSON

192 96 684KB

English Pages [187] Year 1938

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD PDF FILE

Recommend Papers

NATURE CURE FROM THE INSIDE by JAMES C. THOMSON ( A new approach to cancer by James Thomson )

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

NATURE CURE FROM THE INSIDE THE WHY OF CHRONIC DISEASE WITH MANY CASE HISTORIES AND HOME TREATMENTS

BY

JAMES C. THOMSON of the Kingston Clinic, Edinburgh

With an Introduction by J. F. CARSWELL, B.Sc.

PUBLICATIONS DEPARTMENT, KINGSTON CLINIC (EDINBURGH) LTD.

Dedicated to

J. R. T. in sincere admiration and gratitude.

CONTENTS. CHAPTER ONE

HOW WE TAKE WHAT HAPPENS CHAPTER TWO

PRESENT TEACHINGS CHAPTER THREE

SYSTEMIC CONDITIONS CHAPTER FOUR

"WE MADE A MISTAKE IN DIAGNOSIS" CHAPTER FIVE

RECOVERY FROM CHRONIC ILLNESS CHAPTER SIX

COMMERCIAL COMPLICATIONS CHAPTER SEVEN

NOTES FOR HOME TREATMENT LATER DEVELOPMENTS

ARISING OUT OF A BROKEN PROMISE DISCUSSION POINTS

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS THE TAIT BEQUEST

A CONTRIVED MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE THE END OF A CHAPTER

————————oOo———————— (BOOK NOTICES)

AN EXPLANATION The original edition of this book was hastily put together as a result of a broadcast speech by Sir Kingsley Wood, the then Minister of Health. At Christmas 1937 he had made a moving appeal on behalf of a cancer research fund and gave his listeners a personal pledge that in the search for a cure no stone would be left unturned. His almost immediate repudiation of that promise produced a quite remarkable surge of indignation among Nature Cure adherents who had witnessed, or personally experienced, what could be achieved by natural methods. Apparently only selected stones were to be turned A number of items which had then a topical importance have been omitted from the present edition and their place taken by more recent or more fully developed evidence. I feel that this should be of more permanent value and trust that it may be at least equally interesting. JAMES C. THOMSON .

Kingston Clinic, Edinburgh, 18th July 1953.

A WORD FROM THE SOIL AND HEALTH LIBRARY: When preparing this book for online access it seemed to require excessive effort to preserve the original page numbering. However, in numerous locations throughout the text Thomson refers the reader to references within this book, and does so by page number. These locations have either been altered to a general sense, or eliminated.

INTRODUCTION By James F. Carswell Some years ago I heard Mr Thomson say in a lecture:— " Recently a woman died in a London hospital as a result of inhaling asbestos dust twenty-six years ago. The fact that this one woman died after such a time-lag had a splendid press: all the newspapers commented upon it. Had that woman died from any orthodox form of medicine no newspaper would have mentioned the occurrence."

The italics are mine and they emphasise a point of more than passing interest. A failure of the orthodox medical system is not looked upon as having any of what the editor calls " news value." On the other hand, apparent success—and it need only be apparent—is always given great prominence. As I write, many newspapers contain a glowing report of a very uncommon and dangerous operation performed on a patient's heart with the usual " great success." This story apparently did have " news value." Not so the gentleman's death. The only report of it has appeared in the obituary column. I am exceedingly glad that Mr Thomson has written this book, for it should not only come as a light in the darkness, but should dispel fear and offer hope. It will not only bring courage and help to those who are in distress, but I trust that it will do something to stir public opinion against the system, itself a cancerous growth, which is pre-venting true progress and advancement. My own introduction to Nature Cure came through reading one of Dr. Lindlahr's books. I was struck by the fact that no statements or claims were made which could not be substantiated. As a student of science I had come to appreciate only those theories that would work when put into practice. The first essential when an engineer makes a machine is that it must be practical. I found that this was the attitude adopted in all true Nature Cure teachings. When I was studying at the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics, the scientific approach to all subjects—so fundamental in the teaching there—always had the strongest appeal to me. We students were never asked to believe anything which could not be demonstrated. Throughout this Monograph the same predominating attitude will be discovered.

I feel it is a great honour to write this introduction and I am prepared to vouch for the suggestions offered. I have found them to stand the test of rigid practical demonstration. J. F. C. Birmingham.

CHAPTER I HOW WE TAKE WHAT HAPPENS To meet the present impasse in the public and professional outlook on malignant conditions I have adopted a new technique in presenting my thesis to the public. Personalities have been introduced solely for the purpose of obtaining a hearing. Established custom appears to have walled off effectively all other paths of approach. I take this early opportunity of saying that no character, place or institution is fictitious. Every individual mentioned or quoted is, or has been, a living person. The situations are, for the most part, still in being, and the events have either taken place recently or are still in process of happening. I desire to state in unequivocal language that any quarrel I may have is with a system, and not with the practitioners of that system. The only exceptions are where there has been deliberate adoption of dishonourable means to stay the advance of the new methods. As some one has said: " What matters in life is not what happens to us, but how we take what happens." Unfortunately, for most chronic patients, the doctor's acceptance of defeat is implicit in the diagnosis. That is item one of a pernicious routine to which I object strongly. But from my experience I should say that practically never is there malicious effort to produce distressing mental and physical results. In other words, my contention is entirely at variance with that outlined by Dr. Cronin in The Citadel. I believe the real evil in medicine is not the questionable practitioner—but I have gone into that elsewhere.* The ultimate tragedy is not so much in the condition as in the reaction to the diagnosis by both physician and patient. SINCERITY NO SAFEGUARD As I see it, if a doctrine is false, the more conscientious and painstaking the practitioner, the more pernicious and deadly the * Preface to Appendicitis, The Question of V.D., High and Low Blood Pressure, etc.

outcome. That would appear to be inevitable. A false concept of the purpose and meaning of disease can, and does, destroy physical and mental health of both practitioner and patient. The sincerity of the doctor is not the question. Unfortunately, sincerity is no proof of anything except sincerity. But because I respect an honest man as such, even if he is a practitioner of mistaken methods, I have no desire to hold any one up to scorn. For that reason I have withheld names and made certain changes in quoting the statements and documents which were not intended to be made public. So long as the authors of such quoted matter do nothing which would prove dishonest intent, I intend to respect their anonymity. My deductions arising out of certain recurring situations and the applications of certain of our procedures are bound to appear un-warranted to those who accept the popular germ theory as the whole philosophy of disease causation. We believe the germ theory to be an unscientific over-simplification of a rather complicated problem. THE BEGINNINGS OF CHRONIC DISEASE As a background to certain physical conditions we have a functional adaptation (disease-balance) taking place over periods of time usually extending to many years. During this period the rule is that causes and effects have become inextricably confused for the superficial observer. But the causes still subsist in the patient's heredity, environment, mental outlook and everyday habits: not in the tissue changes which have arisen out of these habits and peculiarities. I believe this to be the reason for the present confusion so evident in " investigations " into cancer causation and cure. Cancer researchers concentrate their attention upon these end-results and give no heed to the preceding sustained physiological imbalance which produced these effects. So the search for the causal germ or virus remains barren of real results. In many bodily conditions it is conceivable that the germ may be the final straw. On the other hand, it is probable that the germ is, in most instances, a harmless or even useful inhabitant of the sick

person's body; ill because the patient is ill. As George Bernard Shaw makes the sick bacillus say, in the first act of Too True to be Good:— ". . . These humans are full of horrid diseases: they infect us poor microbes with them; and you doctors pretend it is we who infect them."

And from painful experience, Shaw knew whereof he spoke. Eighteen months of botched doctoring and agony had given him furiously to think. Around the age of forty Shaw, with medical aid, had reached the lowest stage of a depleted, most unwholesome state of health. It was from this and his later investigations that he directly learned of the fallacies propounded under that sadly misapplied name Medical Science. His awakening came in 1898-9. Here is how Hesketh Pearson tells us of the incident in his book, Bernard Shaw:— The trouble had started with a too tightly laced shoe, which brought on an abscess and necrosis of the bone, which involved two operations. . . . The pain was frightful and the foot looked awful. All through his various incapacitations, which included two operations on his foot, a fall downstairs, a broken arm, a thrice-sprained ankle and innumerable contusions, he had been creating a masterpiece, concerning which he wrote to me in 1918:— " When I wrote Caesar I was stumbling about on crutches with a necrosed bone in my foot that everybody believed would turn cancerous and finish me . . . . In trying to come downstairs on crutches before I was used to them I shot myself into empty space and fell right down through the house on to the flags, complicating the useless foot with a broken arm. It was in this condition that I wrote Caesar and Cleopatra; but I cannot see any mark of it on the play. In the spring of '99 the antiseptic treatment of Shaw's foot was discarded for pipe water, and the wound at once began to heal.

Another of his biographers, Frank Harris, gets to the core of the matter in these words:— Unfortunately for him, at that time the Listerian antiseptic treatment of wounds was still in vogue; and the sinus left by the operation was stuffed with iodoform gauze at every dressing, with the result, now well understood, that it would not heal; and Shaw was an invalid on crutches for eighteen months until the Listerian antiseptic was discarded for pipe water, when he immediately recovered, and became a furious anti-Listerian just as, after his smallpox, he had become a furious anti-Jennerian.

LOOK INTO SHAW Shaw had made the logical deduction. From that point onward, until he reached the age of ninety-two or thereby he took control of

his own case, became healthy and remained so. Only fifty years later did the leg again begin to give trouble. I would recommend that any one unfamiliar with his point of view should read at least the introduction to The Doctor's Dilemma and the first act of Too True to be Good. These give a fairly comprehensive answer to some long established, superstitious practices of leading medical and surgical practitioners. These great professions exist upon the certainty that without their supervision healing would not occur. Like Chanticleer, with great earnestness they proclaim that without their early attention darkness and disease would encompass the whole earth. One vital fact the medical student must never be allowed to suspect: that any diseased organ of the body tends to be restored to normal—to become cured in the true sense of that word—if left severely alone during any simple or complex " house-cleaning " effort: any " infectious disease." All orthodox practitioners avert their faces from that disturbing fact. No sermons are ever preached about that marvellous and recurring miracle which is part of the physiology of every living thing. Likewise no reputable journal ever publishes a single article about it, and of course the radio could not allow that kind of advertising over the air! Yet it is a fact which has been the experience of innumerable people who, after trying every known technique for getting themselves well have, in desperation, " let Nature take its course." MIRACLES UNLIMITED G. K. Chesterton once said: " The strange thing about miracles is that they sometimes happen." From what I have seen of life I would say that the strange thing about miracles is that, in the field of physiology alone, they must happen millions of times every day. I imagine that every one of my readers has experienced at least some dozens if not hundreds of miracles within his or her own body over the last twelve months. From the tiniest pin-prick to the most serious damage to flesh and bone, the immediate healing which occurs in any reasonably healthy tissue is in each case a demonstration of our miraculous power to heal the body we live in. But these miracles are so common that they are accepted by everybody without any particular interest being aroused.

Only when such miracles are opposed are they unlikely to happen. Indeed, I can give you no better advice than this: try leaving your body alone to solve its own illnesses as early as possible rather than wait until your case has been " given up as hopeless " by the drug profession. Follow Shaw's lead. Take the responsibility into your own hands and refuse to consider any interference with the healing powers of your body. As a rule all discomfort eases-up as soon as the "fighting " stops. I have seen patients who after living in agony over long periods of time, begin, within hours, to experience considerable relief, soon to be followed by other indications of returning health. All done by just stopping drugs—and usually the " pain-killing " drugs at that! That simple truth about how our bodily intelligence works appears to be too big for most people. Widespread, expensive and intensive education has conditioned our citizens to believe that only a " properly qualified " drug doctor or surgeon is capable of curing human ailments. Accordingly the majority of our people never become even slightly acquainted with many vital facts about the body's most astonishing power: its health-restoring capabilities. Even Shaw never quite got round to recognising that aspect, although it figured in his own most dramatic, real life experience. " NOTHING EXCEPT INJECTIONS " Or perhaps, like a new patient I saw recently, he had not got his Nature Cure philosophy on quite straight. This is how the patient explained the relationship between himself and his doctor: " He knows my ideas about Nature Cure, but he is very understanding and quite tolerant. He knows I won't take drugs, so he gives me nothing except injections."

Or it may be that, like the ancient Wise Men of the East, Shaw's acceptance was: When you stumble upon good fortune, enjoy it—but not to the limit. Be that as it may, we cannot believe that the germ is ever the be-all and the end-all of even the simplest bodily distress. The gradual accumulation of diseased matter in the tissues is the background— the real " disease." The immediate exciting cause of the final flare-up is a comparatively minor detail. It would be as sensible to talk of matches as the explanation and the cause of explosions. Admittedly there would be a certain amount

of truth in such a claim but the implications would constitute a distortion of the fact. In most explosions matches do not appear, and even where they do, the match itself is only one factor. Besides the match there must be a background of explosive material. Likewise there has to be a group of essential conditions. The match, like the germ, cannot be the whole story. We accept the germ as a possible, minor factor; but as the cause— emphatically no. ARTIFICIAL HEALTH That disease exudates can be driven back into the tissues by medical measures designed to injure the germ, we do not question. But, as we understand it, that is merely attacking a symptom. The germ may be killed, but by no stretch of imagination could any such procedure constitute a cure. Obviously the patient, made of the same proto-plasmic material, may be injured at the same time. Dr. Alexis Carrel, generally accepted as a leading authority on modern medicine, has summed up our contentions for us in these words:— " Medicine is far from having decreased human sufferings as much as it endeavours to make us believe . . . the suppression of diphtheria, smallpox, typhoid fever, etc., are paid for by the long sufferings and the lingering deaths caused by chronic affections, and especially by cancer, diabetes, and heart disease."

In another place he says, rather plaintively:— " We should perhaps renounce this artificial form of health and exclusively pursue natural health."

It will be a happy day for all sufferers from civilised disease conditions if Dr. Carrel and his followers ever work up sufficient courage to go deeper into the possibilities outlined in these last few words. Until there is a general understanding of high-level natural health, I believe the alarming growth of cancer, and all other degenerative forms of disease, must continue. Perhaps the most important part of his admission lies in the discovery that the leaders of two opposing schools of thought are agreed:— The suppression of acute disease is paid for in the long suffering and lingering death from arthritis, tuberculosis, heart disease, cancer, Bright's disease, etc.

In a healthy body the above-mentioned unstable material—liable to be stirred into action by any passing irritant—is not allowed to accumulate to any appreciable degree. In a state of natural, vigorous health, the person is protected by what may be called a hair-trigger reaction against external hurtful influences. For instance, if he eats something harmful he is immediately sick. In a more complex situation, where poisonous material has gained entrance to his tissues, there is an urgent effort to eliminate or modify it by concerted and more or less violent and temporary extraordinary action on the part of the kidneys, liver, lungs, skin and bowels, etc., or to burn it up in a passing fever. When, through old age or enervation, there are no longer responses of this nature to imposed impurities (violent sickness, boils, colds, etc.), harmful accumulations of toxic matter form within the body. LOW GRADE " HEALTH " In medical circles this precarious state of sub-health (absence of symptoms) is to-day called " immunity " or " resistance to disease." Such artificial states can be induced by the injection of vaccines, serums, and certain other physiological poisons. It is this dangerous phase, during which the body's healing forces are temporarily subdued, which Dr. Carrel has sensed as not altogether satisfactory. This low-grade health—precarious diseasebalance—permits of the accumulation of the highly explosive mixtures which are later liable to bring about a breakdown without warning. This " artificial health " can exist for months or years. Then sometimes the slightest bruise, pin-prick or " chill " brings sudden and inexplicable breakdown, or death. Otherwise this is the slowly accumulated soil in which degenerative disease conditions flourish. But it should be obvious that the malignant neoplasms which grow in such degenerated tissues cannot possibly be " cured " by any effort directed against the end-result—the growth. Yet repeatedly those engaged in such peculiar activities assure the generously subscribing public that success is just round the corner. Always it is to be just a few more months and the cancer cells are to be defeated. Complete and final victory is, at last, within sight. Not only do training and psychology enter into the problem of real investigation; as matters are arranged to-day, high finance is a powerful determining agent.

THE PUBLIC MISLED In this matter of cancer research the public is consistently misled. Repeated appeals for funds are responded to because the public believes that everything possible is being done. Unfortunately, this is far from the truth. Most of this publicly subscribed money finds its way into the coffers of that great industry—radium production and distribution. Again sincerity is not the question. I take it as beyond need of proof that the greater the sums distributed for this expensive and destructive element, the less attention must be given to the constructive side of health investigation. Here is a statement issued by the British Empire Cancer Campaign:— " If the world is to derive all the benefits that radium and surgery are in a position to give in cancer . . . men and women must know how the enemy is likely to attack . . . and what to do when they think they are attacked. . . . In cancer, successful treatment implies early treatment to an extraordinary extent."

Note how the fear motif is stressed. " enemy-attack " is the essential thought. Radium or deep X-ray therapy to destroy the growth; surgery to remove the growth. That is what they mean by early treatment. There is no suggestion of regenerative effort, or of anything genuinely constructive. Note well the final remark on early surgery in view of the experiments of Drs. Hendrick and Loeb (mentioned in a few pages), and combine that with the lethal effects of fear. WHAT COMPRISES RESEARCH? In an investigation conducted during 1952-53 by the Lasker Foundation, New York, it was discovered that out of a total of 13 million dollars subscribed for research into the causes and cure of cancer, only 3 million dollars had been allocated to research. In this respect it may be well to explain that the word " research " gives no indication of the quality of the work done. Any activity, although not even slightly biased in that direction, is liable to be announced as " Research." So far as I know, within Great Britain no similar, independent investigation has ever been carried out. My own guess is that the figure would be at least as bad as those discovered by the Lasker Foundation about U.S.A.

THEIR GREATEST TRIUMPH For example, consider this piece of monumental stupidity, actually classified as research. A year or two ago we were told that cancer researchers had scored their greatest triumph. It appears that after untold thousands of experiments, a cancer had been grafted upon, and was growing within the tissues of a dove. Please believe me, I am being quite serious. They announced this discovery: how to implant a cancerous growth in a dove, as a scientific triumph! Just in what way was not specified. Certainly since that time there has been no decrease in the cancer death-rate. But on the strength of that achievement the public—the emotional, unquestioning public—gladly contributes more millions of pounds to sustain the funds for further " research." For these bemused ones the truth is too simple. We see all degenerative diseases as arising from the faking of foodstuffs and the mishandling of acute disease conditions, sometimes over several generations. Acute disease we look upon as a health manifestation— a healing and cleansing effort on the part of bodily forces. The repeatedly-thwarted-bodily- " house-cleaning " postulate perfectly covers the gradual and subtle degeneration of organs which results from repeated suppression (" cure ") of acute conditions. RESEARCH RESTRICTED At best, all " Investigation Committees " are composed of, or ruled over by, medical authorities who restrict their activities within carefully defined, and always strictly orthodox limits. It would be altogether foreign to their mode of thought to consider any plan which originated outside their own group. In my younger days, repeatedly I offered to appear before various alleged investigation bodies. I invited their officials to examine my patients before, during and after treatment. In most cases my offers produced not even the courtesy of a reply. Sir Kingsley Wood, Minister of Health in his 1937 Christmas appeal for the Cancer Hospital, pledged his word to prospective subscribers that no stone would be left unturned in the search for a cure. A promise of such serious import should not have been given lightly nor looked upon as a mere rhetorical flourish. I still believe Nature Cure, as applied by adequately trained practitioners, to be a most likely-looking " stone." We cordially invite

the present or any future Minister of Health to investigate our methods. With their minds concentrated upon removal or destruction of the cancer cell, the medical world insists that all investigation must take that line alone. So with fear at the helm and assassination as the aim, nothing constructive has so far appeared, nor is it to be expected. The surgeon is encouraged to remove early growths, and so long as they are latent and benign, his " successes " are frequent—for the moment. But if further developments merit his consideration, he will note how common it is for the areas from which these latent and benign growths have been removed to become malignant. There are no statistics available, but the frequency of such incidents is known to all whose work brings them into contact with the results. The surgeons themselves usually explain away and even exploit such flare-ups as proof that they did not operate early enough or go deep enough, but if they are conscientious and in possession of good observation and a follow-up system, ultimately even they become rather shaken. I quote the words of one, given to me a few months ago:— " I have operated upon many hundreds of carcinomas, but I have watched the results too often. I would not have this operation on myself under any circumstances."

BENIGN TUMOURS BECOME MALIGNANT There is the classic experiment of Loeb. He showed that with a dormant tumour he could bring about rapid growth by merely drawing a silk thread through it. Cutting had a similar effect. Then Burton J. Hendrick, the American cancer expert says:— " Clinical observation long ago established the fact that any irritating interference with a cancer almost always stimulates its growth . . . when extirpated cancers in human beings recur, they increase in size much more rapidly than the original growth."

From my own experience, I should say that surgery may change a benign condition to a malignant condition; that with surgical interference in growths of established malignancy, the chances of a satisfactory outcome are greatly lessened. That is why I postulate as more than a probability the theory that the present financial support of the public given to " cancer research " is intensifying the problem. Certainly they are getting further and

further away from cure. The death-rate increases without remission. Here are the figures:— CANCER:—Deaths per annum per million persons living in England and Wales, 1838 to 1948. Based on the Registrar-General's Statistical Reviews. Years

Deaths (per million)

Years

Deaths (per million)

Years

Deaths (per million)

1838-46

200

1881-85

523

1921-25

1212

1847-50

274

1886-90

595

1926-30

1379

1851-55

306

1891-95

686

1931-35

1482

1856-60

327

1896-1900

763

1936-40

1575

1861-65

367

1900-05

845

1940-43

1793

1866-70

403

1906-10

907

1944-48

1900

1871-75 1876-80

432 479

1911-15 1916-20

999 1149

1949-53

?

These figures pose an urgent problem. I believe the answer can be found in high-level health. Before discussing this aspect and as a basis of understanding between us, I would remind the reader that all statements, events, situations, institutions and personalities are strictly factual. Having special consideration for newcomers to the Nature Cure point of view, I have tried to bring only the essential factors into my arguments. Likewise I have used only the plainest language. I do not claim this thesis as a complete statement, but if any exaggeration of the truth has crept in, it has been unintentional. My feelings are strong, and accordingly it is difficult for me to restrain myself to unemotional terms. It may be that in this direction I have not been entirely successful.

CHAPTER II PRESENT TEACHINGS I do not believe the problem of that peculiar cell-hysteria called cancer to be insoluble. That is to say, it is no more insoluble than any other problem of biology. Medical authorities tell us that it baffles them and, in their abundant writings they relate the apparently insuperable difficulties encountered at every turn. But a careful scrutiny reveals a situation reminiscent of " Flatland." The solution hangs just over their heads, out in the open for anyone to see, but nobody looks up. For some reason not readily discoverable, none of the Recognised Authorities can be induced to turn his eyes in the direction of the banned fact. The profession rushes around it, and under it, looking into every nook and cranny; they cry to high heaven to grant them discovery. But it must be somewhere else. " Not there, not there! " That is how it appears to the detached onlooker. But prolonged observation indicates that for them there is no real awareness of the proximity of what they seek. Gradually it dawns upon the observer that these people are living in Flatland. They have been born (or is education the answer?) without a third dimension. Length they appreciate, breadth they understand, but height and depth are words without meaning. The difficulties are essentially psychological. Self-imposed restrictions as to direction of search, and a holy determination not to acknowledge certain excommunicated data: these would appear to be first essentials. The ancient who noted that there are none so blind as those who will not see, must have had cancer " researchers " in mind! The conservative researcher encounters mysterious resistances where others have found only a clear path. His problem appears to be wrapped up in his student-days' conditioning—an intellectual refusal to gaze upon realities. He knows too many things that are not so. HOW FEAR ACTS As I see it, the problem in any given case, is to determine whether physical uncleanliness or the psychic miasmas, hatred and fear, are the primary biasing agents. That chronic, destructive disease conditions can arise out of mental stresses set up by fear and panic is becoming more and more

freely acknowledged. The fearful person is a pitiful object when his dread is open and acknowledged. When " for the sake of appearances " it is concealed from the world the effects can be devastating. That is not to say that the worst effects show immediately. The tensions may pass and be repeated over considerable periods of time before any serious symptoms become manifest. Fear and hatred have much in common, and I think we may accept the probability of similar tissue changes arising from both psychic states. The nerves—vasomotors—which control the size of the small arteries are affected by every passing emotion. It is through the vasomotors allow the small arteries to distend, and this in turn, allows more blood to pass. With intense anger, hatred, fear or worry, the vasomotors contract the walls of the affected vessels and comparatively little blood gets through. Hence the pallor.* That, in short, is the mechanism which starves the tissues of the hating person. Likewise with the frightened person and the worrier. These emotions set up certain reflexes within the body which result in nutritional breakdown despite the greatest care in food selection, graduated exercises, etc. Dr. Tilden noticed that those whose lives are filled with hatred frequently die with malignant growths, while happy individuals are seldom affected. This confirms Reich's theory that those who " say a gigantic nay to life and love " are liable to experience putrefaction in the living (his description of cancer). But hatred and fear of life are not always readily recognisable. In certain circles it is not good form to give evidence of such plebian stresses. Even so in the economic, racial and national sections of civilised life and thought, passions are readily aroused. So uneasy is the control in politics and religion that the best people bar discussion on these subjects. Meanwhile these disguised hatreds and denials of life can sear the soul and mortify the flesh. * The reflex of anger, fear and hatred appears to reach its maximum within the structure of the adrenal bodies. (Two " cocked-hat " glands, situated one over each kidney.) Here the controlling nerves produce a reversed action. The internal vessels are dilated, which results in an increased the secretion of adrenalin. Any excess of this substance in the blood brings a violent response from the vasomotor nerves. This means that the systemic small arteries become smaller, which results the blood pressure rising correspondingly. With many repetitions of these disturbing emotions, there appears to arise degraded cell response, with accompanying toxic and nutritional abnormalities.

THE PLACE OF FOOD Cell cleanliness depends primarily upon correct feeding, particularly upon food balance and suitability. Orthodox cancer " investigators " usually attempt to belittle this fact. Here is an example from The Truth About Cancer, issued by the British Empire Cancer Campaign:— ". . . there is no shred of reliable evidence that consumption of, or abstinence from, any particular article of diet leads to the occurrence of cancer. . . ."

The paragraph quoted above appears on page 24. Yet on page 3 of the same book we had already learned that: " If the food materials be deficient in quantity or quality, healthy life and growth are impossible."

If there is any problem directly connected with the prevention and cure of cancer, it is how to encourage healthy life and growth in the tissues of the body. When the book first appeared, the contentions regarding food were answered by a group of food enthusiasts in a circular letter to the newspapers:— " The mortality statistics in various occupations issued by the RegistrarGeneral show the death-rate from cancer to be 54 amongst agricultural labourers and 110 amongst seamen. This is an amazing difference, considering that both agricultural workers and seamen lead an active life in the open air. But the average agriculturist eats a considerable quantity of fresh, natural vegetable food, and usually he is too poor to buy much meat. On the other hand, the sailor lives chiefly on preserved and devitaminised foods which usually include an over-supply of meat. A high proportion of chronic diseases and an excessively high mortality rate are the common fate of sailors."

COAL TAR That may look like a good answer, but once again we face an alluring but misleading over-simplification. An item has been omitted which is no small factor in cancer causation. Every investigator knows that coal tar is a powerful irritant, and those who come in frequent contact with it (e.g., sailors) show increased incidence of cancer. Absorption of coal-tar products—either industrially or in medicines—is a common precursor of malignant growths. A similar risk is run by those who use analine products or have them injected for medicinal purposes. Coal-tar derivatives are prescribed in many conditions such as headaches and neuritis.* They * Many of the freely-prescribed imitation vitamins (synthetics) are made from coal tar.

are also used as hypnotics (sleep-producers), sedatives, rheumatism medicines, laxatives, as well as in many perfumes and hair dyes. If the present phobias regarding microbes could be transformed into a reasonable precaution against the use of coal tar in any form, internally or externally, there can be little doubt that this would lessen greatly the incidence of cancer. FOODS AND SHORT EXPERIMENTS The matter of a balanced diet for health maintenance has been gone into fully elsewhere,† so on this occasion I shall omit any lengthy discussion. The difficulty about diet is that most of those who make experiments usually " prove " their case by something which happened to one or two persons over periods of a few days or some weeks at most. Such individual short term experiments are of little value because repeatedly a major factor is omitted. For instance, it is probable that the average person, freed from fear, could live for some three months or longer without food. Yet we have all heard of people who have " starved to death " in a few days. Such deaths do not take place because of any lack of food. In most cases sheer terror arising out of fixed beliefs, often complicated by exposure brings about the fatal termination. Likewise with many a chronic patient. Before he comes under Nature Cure, he may have experienced a loss of weight to the extent that his condition may be described as " skin and bone," and yet one of our first efforts may have to be directed towards a cleaning up of the acid-saturated tissues of this already pitiably emaciated person. Orthodox relatives and other onlookers object; they insist that the patient must first be " built up." That kind of intervention can prevent the achievement of a satisfactory outcome. † Two Health Problems: Constipation and Our Civilisation ; Food for Health; Too Many Cooks, etc.

CHAPTER III SYSTEMIC CONDITIONS And what of physical uncleanliness? What part does it play in the initiation of tumours and other chronic states? Here is Dr. Lindlahr's opinion (Nature Cure: Philosophy and Practice):— " For many years I have been teaching that cancer is a constitutional disease . . . rooted in every drop of blood in the body . . . certain disease taints of food and drug poisons . . . irritate and stimulate the cells . . . and cause abnormal multiplication or proliferation in the form of benign or malignant tumours. . . . It may be caused by the gradual accumulation in the system of certain poisons which form in decaying animal matter."

Robert Bell, M.D., is unusually out-spoken in certain of his conclusions. I take one or two at random:— " Cleanliness is next to Godliness. It is equally true that filth is incompatible with health. . . . [certain foods] entering into the dietary not only undergo the most offensive form of decomposition and give rise to the most noxious toxins, but also . . . favour their absorption. I am convinced that cancer can only take root and thrive upon a structure which has, for a considerable period, been gradually departing from the healthy standard, due to its being dependent upon, and being constantly in contact with, a polluted bloodstream. . . ."

PHYSICAL AND ETHICAL MORALITY Here is how Dr. Tilden explains it:— All so-called organic diseases have a history of years of functional crises. For example, all cases of cancer of the breast have suffered with repeated painful enlargements. At first the swelling subsides at the end of each crisis. Then . . . the swellings disappear save for a small hard lump, which grows gradually larger at each crisis until it excites alarm. A doctor is called and the breast is removed. Then in a year or two or three the other breast takes on the same pathology, and it also is removed. But in a year or two more other troubles develop— cancer develops in the scar tissue. X-ray and radium fail. There has been a state of toxemia from beginning to end which has received no attention. Had it been corrected at the beginning the first operation would not have been made necessary. In my surgical days I cured fibroid tumours by amputation and the patient would die some years afterwards. The patient having declared that the operation had given her the best health she ever had.

From knowledge since gained, I know that, had I corrected her manner of living, and rid her of toxemia, the operation would not have been necessary; her life would have been prolonged at least thirty years, and the tumour would have atrophied. When acute diseases are cured not palliated, they do not end in tuberculosis, cancer, et alii. The practice of medicine is a joke when it is not a tragedy. I learned, after twenty years of medical and surgical practice, that medicine is one of civilisa-tion's great delusions. The business of selling cures without reformation, is one of the big businesses of our time. . . . Enervating habits build physical and mental diseases—physical disease, mental insanity, and crime. So-called cures are nothing more than palliation. Discomforts are anodyned, the habits that brought on the sickness are continued until premature death ends life. Doctors cure a disease that exists in the mind only. The whole system of medicine is a fallacy from beginning to end. . . . As a result . . . so-called civilisation does not have the slightest conception of what morality means. Medical delusion searches and researches the earth for the cause and cure of disease, when it is within the body and mind of every man and woman. . . . A doctor can help the sick by reminding them that, if they wish to get well and stay well, they must stop getting drunk on food, liquor, tobacco, temper, and passion—in a word, avoid sensuality, even if it is permitted by doctors, preachers and moralists. Humanity is travelling in the ox-cart, so far as the cause and cure of disease is concerned. Disease is built by habits that enervate, and enervation checks elimination of the worn-out waste products of metabolism. This waste, kept in the body, builds all kinds of so-called diseases. Most religionists, it matters not what affliction they bring upon themselves, " go to the Lord in prayer." If prayer fails, a doctor is called. He undertakes to cure without removing cause, or somebody's aspirin or make-believe cure-all will be used. The excuse for this perverse moral state is the fact that health-breaking habits are not looked upon as immoral, and sickness is not considered as evidence of immorality.—J. H. Tilden, M.D. (Written in his 90th year after 50 years of N.C. Practice).

TISSUE UNCLEANLINESS Now let us return to Dr. Lindlahr. Considering the possibilities of further advance (?) along the present trends in State Medication, he says:— " Before the child has reached the years of adolescence it will have had injected into its blood the vaccines, serums and antitoxins of smallpox, hydrophobia, tetanus, cerebro-spinal meningitis, typhoid fever, diphtheria, pneumonia, scarlet fever, etc., etc."

It is such products of decay and foreign matter from animal cells which constitute the most deadly form of physical uncleanliness. It is this form of uncleanliness that these teachers have in mind when they warn their readers. It is such accumulations which form the physical key to the abnormal proliferation (cell multiplication and growth) manifesting as malignant tumours. But for a long time before this hysteria of the cells is initiated, the body has made repeated efforts to master the unhealthy situation. Frequently the elimination of scrofulous and psoric matter begins with enlarged tonsils, which first show acute inflammatory changes, with pus formation, and passing by stages to sub-acute and later to chronic conditions. With abuses of feeding and medication maintained over long periods, the enlargement slowly changes into cheesy decay within the glands themselves. This complicated set of events indicates clearly that the glands have been attempting to do more work than they can properly accomplish. The only correct procedure is to lessen the need for vicarious eliminative effort. Surgical extirpation of the abused and overworked organ is no answer to the problem. The morbid matter, which was being carried out of the body through these extraordinary tonsillar activities, was nothing more or less than cellular excretion—a throwing-out of physiological uncleanliness. With that exit closed (through surgical removal of the part) some other organ or part is called upon form an exit. This means that boils, open sores, haemorrhoids, tic ulcers, scrofulous glands, and such-like fontanelles of escape have to be established. To such exits these unwelcome poisons are directed by the vital forces and exuded from the body. Any sustained irritation—chemical or mechanical—may bring about a laying-down of deposits of body-wastes anywhere in the body. The difficulty of recognising the purpose behind these make-shift accumulations arising from mis-taken suppression of acute conditions is, to some extent, indicated in Chapter IV. WHERE DEPOSITS FORM Under ordinary treatment, each of these outlets is in turn blocked by medical applications or by surgical removal. Ultimately all the available extra exits for the morbid matter are shut off. The only solution now open to the body's cleansing forces is for this unwhole-some material to be assembled in some comparatively inactive part of the body. Dr. Lindlahr has explained this situation clearly, thus:—

" Wherever in the system morbid secretions suppressed by medical treatment concentrate, there, inevitably, will be found the seat of chronic disease."

As to location:— " At corresponding ages single women are more liable to suffer from cancer of the breast than married women."—(Circular 826, issued by the Ministry of Health.)

HAHNEMANN'S PSORA What is this matter which is so resented by the latent somatic intelligence of the human cells, pushed out by the body's forces and so enthusiastically denied exit by medical " science "? Hahnemann's Theory of Psora provides an inkling. He believed that suppression of psoric parasites was the foundation of most civilised chronic disease. From the Nature Cure point of view, Dr. Lindlahr's summing up covers this point in these words:— " After suppression of itchy eruptions, lice, crab lice, etc. . . . [there are] organs and localities of the body in which the suppressed disease taints have concentrated. " Such suppressions represent not only the scrofulous taints which Nature was trying to eliminate by means of eruptions and parasites, but, in addition to these, the poisons contained in the bodies of the parasites, and the poisons which were used to suppress or kill them. ". . . the bodies of the itch parasites (sarcoptes scabiei) contain an exceedingly poisonous substance—' psorinum.' When these minute animals burrowing in and under the skin are killed '. . . the morbid taints in their bodies are absorbed by the system and added to the psoric poisons which Nature has been trying to eliminate. " Thus, after suppression of itchy eruptions, the organism is encumbered with three poisons instead of one: (1) the hereditary or acquired scrofulous and psoric taints which the cells of the body were throwing off into the blood-stream and which the blood was feeding to the parasites on the surface, (2) the morbid substance contained in the bodies of the parasites, (3) the drug poisons used as suppressants."

He goes on to explain how this unholy mixture may be held latent in the system for many years before becoming active. How in combination with other disease taints and with food and drug poisons they form the basis of the different forms of chronic destructive disease, and ". . . the itch or psora taint is actually at the bottom of the cancerous diathesis."

PHYSIOLOGICAL UNCLEANLINESS Nor do itch parasites alone produce toxins; any decaying animal tissue produces similar physiological uncleanliness. Thus serums, inoculations and vaccines, if retained within the body, give rise to vital strain and liability to ultimate breakdown. Until that breakdown occurs there exists a state of what I have called disease-balance. This is Carrel's "artificial health," the antithesis of high-level health, which embraces comparatively vigorous reaction against foreign matter. It is through these vigorous, indeed often violent reactions that deposits of retained matter are prevented from forming. It is just these violent reactions of the somatic forces against this retained unclean matter that is called acute disease. The Nature Cure philosophy accepts fevers, colds, diarrhoeas and other acute disturbances as healing and cleansing efforts on the part of our vital force. But the medical practitioner sees each such acute " attack " as something which comes upon the body from without. The victim " picks up a germ " and no one sees any relationship to previous habits of the patient or to his previous medication. In medicine there is no sequence from one " disease " to another. Each disease is kept in a separate mental pigeon-hole. To the medical student it would be ludicrous to suggest that an injection for diphtheria twenty years ago could have any possible bearing upon the cancer of to-day. Through his laughter and his tears he will explain that the acute diseases are caused by bacilli, viruses, and so forth—they have nothing in common with cancer. For the correct answer to that argument I refer the reader to Drs. Carrel and Williams (mentioned elsewhere in this booklet). BEWARE OF INJECTIONS The toxins, cultures, and the injections generally, probably hold an approximately similar relationship to cancer as do the itch parasites. Remember that the cells from an animal—no matter how healthy— must be foreign matter when inserted into human tissues. The momentary reaction may be stimulating, but it is obvious that high-level health cannot be attained by such means, and the ultimate possibilities for evil are considerable. This would be true even if the source has been a healthy animal.

But most of the matter used for injections comes from the blood, excretions, pus or other exudates of diseased animals or humans. This unspeakable matter is injected (in the name of health) under the skin so that the normal defences of the body are given no opportunity to reject it. In this way, already diseased or decaying matter is added to the existing toxic overload. Here is a situation analogous to that already discussed. This new, decaying animal matter has approximately the same potentialities for evil as the decaying bodies of itch and other parasites. The danger of cancer arising later out of such injections is no small one, and the risk is probably increased when living matter is injected. Serums and cultures may contain animal cells which have become sufficiently atypical to approximate closely to those found in the abnormal structures of a much-medicated patient. Consider the possibility of two groups of similarly-degraded cells, one already part of the vitiated tissues of the host, the other coming from a diseased animal. Should they chance to have an abnormal affinity, I postulate as a possibility the danger of a foreign colony of short-lived animal cells becoming established and flourishing in the tissues of their human host. Once started, any such colony of modified cells would be ideally situated to begin a rapid, but uncontrolled and unwholesome growth. LARGE AND SMALL FAMILIES To explain this point, a short deviation would appear to be indicated. It is a law in biology that animals living in circumstances which make survival difficult exhibit two phenomena. First, in the early stages, there are greater numbers born, and secondly, their structures undergo frequent mutations—more and more individuals depart from the normal standards of habit and appearance. In groups of animals similarly affected, the next stage is sterility, followed by degenerative disease and extinction. In the human kingdom, a mild illustration of the first stages is to be found by comparing families living in the slums with those living in well-to-do circumstances. In slum areas the families are larger, and among the children more deformity will be found. In the animal and vegetable kingdoms we have many similar illustrations. Just such cells of unusual shape and size would begin to appear in the new colony we have suggested as having become established in a

wrong environment. There is no obvious reason why such a parasitic growth should cease to enlarge itself until it had destroyed its host. Before the end, such a growth would be diagnosed as a cancer. A similar natural law appears to be in operation where any protoplasmic structure exists in the continued presence of any substance which tends toward its destruction. This condition is fulfilled when there has been repeated medication, particularly with coal tar, arsenic* or heavy metallic substances, or when foreign or diseased proteins have been introduced, e.g., by vaccinations and inoculations. If my speculation has any validity, the fashion for culturing and injecting degraded animal cells into sick persons should have brought about a marked increase and a rising death-rate from degenerative diseases, tumours, etc. In so far as this test can be applied, the " ayes " have it; but, unfortunately, as we have already seen, plenty of other factors in modern medicine and food manipulation come in to add their quota. No single test would ever seem to be a sufficient proof of anything in so com-plicated a field of study. * See The Question of V.D. by the present author.

KINGSTON : "THE HOME OF MODERN NATURE CURE"

CHAPTER IV " WE MADE A MISTAKE IN DIAGNOSIS " Cancer having been established, what can be done to achieve a cure? In my experience a high proportion of the cases at present diagnosed as cancer are curable. For the moment, the question of whether they have been rightly or wrongly diagnosed is beside the point. After our treatment has proved successful it is frequently discovered that there has been a mistake. But previous to that, they have been typical, serious cases—the type which brings in their train lingering and unspeakable mental and physical distress, and which, outside of Naturopathic attention, would inevitably result in treatment by means of radium, deep X-ray therapy or radical operations. They are what Professor J. Arthur Thomson had in mind when he spoke of cancer as " a dirty fighter, maiming and torturing his victim before finishing him." Professor Thomson accepted the orthodox outlook, but whether his choice of the villain is correct or otherwise, there can be no doubt of the maiming and torturing experiences which follow upon the usual cancer treatment. To that extent, but only to that extent I can reassure my readers. I am in a position to say that what has been most positively diagnosed as cancer by leading British specialists has been cured. Of that I am certain, but that is as far as I can go. The reason is worthy of consideration. Whenever a satisfactory result is reached under our care, there is always a rush by the experts to alter their own diagnoses. As far as my experience goes, this is the only set of circumstances wherein there is real eagerness to admit an error on the part of orthodox authorities. Whenever satisfactory results are achieved by our Nature Cure methods, the routine explanation offered to the patient's relatives runs:—"We must have made a mistake. It could not possibly have been cancer." THE MECHANISM OF CURE Personally, I cannot understand why we should be so distrustful of the forces which built our bodies out of the initial, almost invisible speck of protoplasm. The more these marvellous achievements are studied, the more we recognise an intelligence, and a majesty which can only be vaguely sensed by the human imagination. Yet these

forces which did that awe-inspiring work are still on the job. As I see it, if they can build a body, they should be able to keep it in repair. Any successes achieved in Nature Cure practice is founded upon that concept. So my answer to the question, " Is cure possible in genuine cancer? " is this: no matter how serious the condition, the body is best left to do its own curing. There is one proviso : it must be allowed to do its own curing in its own way. This may sound simple, but in civilised surroundings it is neither simple nor, in many cases, possible. The disturbing factors are early training in habits of body and mind. There is widespread but completely false conditioning about the purpose and meaning of acute disease. The body's life-saving, healing and cleansing purposes are seldom appreciated or encouraged. The salient points are neither understood nor even noticed. In the words of Elbert Hubbard: " It is always the nearest, plainest and simplest principles that learned men see last." Nor is it only the medical doctor who stops aches and uneasiness without worrying about causes. In every city there are numerous shops where laymen purchase their favourite remedies. These may be chemical or herbal. The benumbing agents of the profession are equally obtainable by the layman in their undisguised chemical forms or as patent medicines. Aspirin, phenacetin, barbiturates, etc., etc., are all used freely along with other sedatives, headache powders and such like—even baby soothing powders—a high proportion of which are coal-tar derivatives. (Remember the effects of coal tar on the body, mentioned already). Consider the gradual cumulative effect over many years of this abuse. Add to this, every effort of the body to cleanse itself thwarted and frustrated. Then note the final result, which is so puzzling to the professional agents who brought it about! Here is a recent case wherein I believe, a trivial incident indicates a solution. HOPE IN NEGLECT The belief of the medicals is that it is dangerous to neglect cancer. Indeed, they go much further. Here is a joint statement issued (1937) by Charles Hill, M.A., D.P.H., Deputy Medical Secretary of the British Medical Association, and H. A. Clegg, M.A., M.B., M.R.C.P., Deputy Editor of the British Medical Journal:—

". . . the only hope for a patient with a tumour—cancer—is early operation and treatment with X-rays or radium. To delay matters . . . in such cases is criminal."

Despite that authoritative statement, my impression remains that in medical hands neglect is the only hope for the patient. The following case provides an illustration. " TWELVE WEEKS " The patient was a frank and outspoken woman, aged 48. As a result of her own and her friends' experiences she had lost all faith in doctors. She came to me solely as the lesser of two evils. She had not been to a doctor for eighteen years—since the birth of her last child. Her complaint was that there had been flooding* for twelve weeks, with some irregularity previously and occasional headaches. On examination it was found that the left breast had a large indurated fixed tumour and the nipple retracted out of sight, and with a slight suppurating wound external to the nipple position. Asked how long the breast had been troubling her, she said: "Eighteen months, but I am not worrying about that. It was getting worse for a time, but now it is getting much better." A LIFE-SAVING FLUX I suggested twelve weeks as the approximate time during which there had been improvement. This she admitted, but impatiently said she did not wish anything done about the breast—she was anxious to have the flooding stopped. That, and that only. Here, so long as the flooding continued, I am prepared to believe that the malignant growth would have remained comparatively free from pain and latent, or even have become smaller. But, apart from the drugs which would have been used in medical circles, there is a tendency for flooding to stop automatically with the menopause. This is not always the case, however. I know of cancer cases where flooding continued until many years beyond the usual menopause period. In such cases it was only when the bleeding stopped that the malignant growth became troublesome. The routine followed by most professional men would be to stop the bleeding as rapidly as possible. I believe this procedure to be a * Excessive menstrual flow.

mistake. It could remove the possibility of cure, whether done by medicinal interference, biochemistry, herbalism, fasting, hydrotherapy, homoeopathy or hypnotism. The only permissible method within the orbit of Nature Cure philosophy would be derivative. The vicarious effort should cease because it is no longer necessary. The normal organs of elimination would have to be coaxed to do their work more efficiently, so that there would be no need of help from the uterine mucosa. It may be of passing interest that the flooding in this case actually ceased in eight days under treatment along these derivative lines. AN INTELLIGENT LEAVING ALONE This is the type of case wherein what Tilden called " an intelligent leaving alone " is called for. Personally, I know of no better formula; it is the only correct treatment in such a case. The " intelligence " aspect had been neglected in this instance. The patient had been taking quantities of meat, fish and chicken " to make up for the loss of blood." This, combined with heavy tea-drinking, was adding greatly to the systemic difficulties. The overfeeding represented grave additional strains upon the nutritional, cleansing and neutralising mechanisms of the body. The flooding was a safety exit for dangerous materials. Unfortunately, under usual circumstances, the patient is far too frightened and agitated by the name " cancer " to be able to apply calmly the necessary intelligent co-operation with the body's healing forces. That is so even in the unlikely event of a clear understanding of both the theory and practice of natural methods. I described some aspects of this case to another patient who was similarly suffering from a malignant breast tumour. Her remark was illuminating. " That is exactly what happened in my own case. I was given iodine and other things to stop the flooding. It was after that that my breast got so bad." THE MEANING OF CURE The commonly accepted meaning of the word cure introduces a wholly bogus idea from which all logical thinking has been banished. That one person can heal another or that any drug or food or magical injection could have such a power is opposed to all our understanding of logic, health and sanity. The function of breathing or of assimilating food cannot be passed from one person to another.

Just as surely, one person cannot " cure " for another. The only dynamic approach to cure is the attitude implied in the original use of the word: an unremitting and searching curiosity about first causes and a sustained effort to rectify self-and-health-destroying habits. The definition of Nature Cure I accept is suggested by A. D. Darbishire in his Introduction to a Biology: CARE OF THE HEALTHY = CURE " Curiosity is a defiance of the conspiracy of silence, a defiance urgently needed when the topic which has been pronounced taboo is the operation of the human mind. " The tragedy of the word ' curious ' is the result of the outward-streaming nature of man's interest. Most of the meaning has been caught up in the current and swept out from the mind, and has made its home amongst things. And even the noun from which the adjective curious is derived has been swept outwards too. When the adjective curious detached itself from its parent substantive, cure meant care. Thus cure first meant care of the healthy; then the successful treatment of the sick; and lastly the drug supposed to drive away the malady. We speak of and even believe in a cough cure. So different a meaning has ' cure ' come to have from that with which it began that we could say ' better use cure in the old sense than rely upon cure in the new.' "

An even more difficult aspect arises for those who have approached our system through some restricted avenue (e.g., through some well-advertised system of dieting, or course of exercises or breathing or of treatment through manipulation) to find the horizon suddenly opening out. With no slight shock they become aware that Nature Cure reaches out to the whole circumference of life as we know it. Forthwith the problem is what to leave out. But quite definitely, there are items to be omitted. A list with reasons will be found in that excellent brochure But is it Nature Cure? by C. Leslie Thomson, B.Sc. FROM CHRONIC BACK TO ACUTE During the process of clearing up any chronic ailment there are, as a rule, several unpleasant phases. First, a series of house-cleaning crises* during which various organs or parts of the body manifest unusual and often irksome activity. There are usually recurrences of partly forgotten discomforts from many years before, but the principal symptoms are largely dependent upon the particular area * For fuller particulars see The Healing Crisis.

where the accumulations have taken place. Itchy skin eruptions are common, as are fevers, diarrhoeas and ulcers. Each of these holds the field for some time, to be supplanted by some other unpleasant but essential cleaning-up effort. Along with this dirty exuded matter what we may call the soil of the growth is carried out of the body. Sometimes these efforts are brought to a successful termination without any great discomfort to the patient. As a rule, after a certain amount of this housecleaning has been undergone, there develops a complete encystment (enclosure within a neutral wall) of what remains of the tumour. This is probably the most satisfactory solution in the majority of cases. In this form the growth will remain dormant without further discomfort, so long as certain essentials are given full consideration. A body which has fallen so far behind with its normal, daily house-cleanings must be encouraged rather more than the average. That is why we emphasise the cleansing foods and encourage the patient for the rest of his life to eat nothing which would add greatly to the difficulties of normal elimination, and so add to the existing encumbrances. " FATHER, FORGIVE THEM . . ." Perhaps the foregoing is sufficient indication of why the experts who confine their treatments to the suppression of obvious surface symptoms are so certain that malignant growths are incurable. That, I believe, is why orthodox authorities see any cure achieved outside their own system as a proof of a mistaken diagnosis. By their methods after the appearance of a tumour, every effort at tissue cleansing is turned back upon itself—not only flooding but every other unusual cleansing effort from skin-rashes to diarrhoea, boils, vomiting or fevers. Whether suppression is done by drugs, radium, X-rays, herbs, or by manipulation is a detail. Fear and distrust are the driving forces behind the prevention of normal cleansing efforts. This mental attitude, accompanying all suppression, presents no small difficulty. If recovery is to be achieved, we must first have some understanding of the purpose behind these natural efforts. With misunderstanding arising out of fear and leading straight to panic, the usual catastrophe is to be anticipated.

CHAPTER V RECOVERY FROM CHRONIC ILLNESSES Any investigator can soon discover ample proofs that something has gone wrong. Either the diagnosis of specialists is utterly unreliable or correct treatment does produce satisfactory recoveries in cases wherein the only alternative the drug doctor has to offer is an im-mediate, mutilating, and all-too-often futile operation. Here are parts of a letter which I sent, by invitation, to the Managing Director of an Edinburgh Insurance Office:— " Dear Sir, " I would draw your attention to a certain widespread abuse of privilege which must involve the insurance world in grave financial loss. I speak with particular reference to what may be called medical misunderstandings regarding malignant growths (cancers). Certain of the basic fallacies are obvious, and I believe insurance offices are in a position to expose them. Indeed, it is because at the present time we have a client in common, whose case illustrates the point of this letter, that I am bringing the matter to your attention. " Through our methods of treatment, there are practitioners in this country achieving cures in malignant conditions which have been called ' incurable ' by leading specialists and medical practitioners. With his permission, I refer you to the case of Dr——. Less than a year ago, his was diagnosed as a case of carcinoma and certified as incurable. " It may interest you to know that when I first examined Dr—— said that I thought we could produce a cure, but at the same time indicated that, in all probability, the specialist's opinion would be changed as soon as a satisfactory result had been established. Then the professor would confess to a mistake in diagnosis. Now that the treatment has met with a certain degree of success, I am informed that his certificate of disability has been changed to chronic inflammation. At the same time, an acknowledgment was made that the previous diagnosis was mistaken. " It is more than probable that your attention has not been drawn to this type of evasion and the implications—financial and otherwise—involved. Yet it has become a routine abuse, in any other field it would indicate either atrocious inefficiency or be called fraudulent. " As you may be interested, I enclose a report which gives a newspaper reporter's version of an even more glaring instance.* " This man is to-day fit and well, but before coming under our care I am informed that he was demonstrated before medical students of Glasgow * The report mentioned was from one of the Sunday newspapers of that time which had an article giving an outline of our treatment of chronic conditions and its success in several cancer cases.

University as an utterly incurable case. In this example, likewise, the excuse offered was a ' mistaken diagnosis ' ! " This despite the fact that they made and hold microsopic slides and X-ray plates which they earlier claimed were incontrovertible proof of malignancy. " I think you must agree that there are but two alternatives:— EITHER . . . OR " 1. Either we do achieve cures in these cases, and if so, we should be given credit. Meanwhile it would be to the advantage of insurance bodies to be able to advise clients from their knowledge of the facts. The registered Naturopath is in a position to give this general advice to insured persons—how to maintain health and vigour. " 2. Alternatively, if our successes in such cases are solely due to mistaken diagnoses of specialists, it would appear to be more than strange if such mistakes occur only in cases which come under our care. If these mistakes are common, this means much unnecessary expense incurred by your own and other companies.* " I suggest that the time is now ripe for this matter to be probed by the executives of insurance bodies. If the insurance companies of Great Britain would join with practitioners of the new school, it might be to the advantage of both. As you have most of the details of the case I mention in your possession you may easily check my statements. " An exactly similar situation exists in the case of asthma, heart conditions, nephritis, high blood pressure and the other so-called ' incurable ' conditions. " I hold myself ready to furnish further details and give what help I can toward putting the facts before any committee or meeting you may care to convene. There is no reason why your bodies should not recognise the more modern methods, which, we believe, not only restore health to the ailing, but may bring vigorous health to those who are only fairly well."

THE PROFESSOR REFUSES I believe that to be a fair synopsis of how and why the public is being misled by official medicine. For those who can read between the lines, it also indicates the desperate straits of official medicine when faced with any real breakdown in health. A fairly common reaction of many specialists to our successes is illustrated in a letter from a patient who tells of how, at a London

* Considered from the patient's point of view, there is also the expense and business losses attached to a quite unnecessary major operation, which would at best mutilate for life and incur danger of invalidism and death (also refer back to Loeb's experiment, mentioned earlier). These were items not mentioned because not proper to the subject of the letter.

social reception, she met a professor who, as consultant, had been called in on several occasions by her practitioner. The previous meeting had been in such an emergency several years before, when she had been in an agonised and desperate condition. The Professor first expressed amazement at seeing her so fit and full of life. This greeting was immediately followed by a question as to what means his colleague had used to bring about a cure. On being told that the credit belonged to Nature Cure, he overwhelmed her with questions as to what we had done. In selfdefence the patient offered to invite her practitioner to send details of the treatment. The incident concluded:— " I never dreamed that Professor —— would deliberately close his mind to any form of scientific healing. He had seemed sympathetic enough to be genuinely enquiring. He did not help me at all, and when I left his hands I was in a state of continuous pain. Yet his reply, friendly but curt, was: " Our practices are so far apart, I do not think anything would be gained by correspondence."

" SPONTANEOUS CURES " The bearing that this and similar incidents have upon the public outlook on incurable diseases may not be obvious to the casual reader, but the effects are pernicious. In standard medical works on cancer there are always records of what are called spontaneous cures. We read of cases wherein the practitioner was unable to afford relief, and then, " without undergoing any treatment," the patient begins to get well. HOW SOME OF OUR WORK IS NOTICED There is a catch in that charming story. Unless I am much mistaken, the letter just quoted shows the wheels going round. This professor will be unusually generous if, in future lectures to his students, he discusses this case and gives credit to the Nature Cure treatment. If the case is mentioned at all, it is dismissed with some such phrase as " This patient experienced spontaneous cure without treatment." After that, no further mention will be made of either the patient or the cure. The fact that there was a change in the patient's general mode of life; that careful manipulative and hydropathic treatments were given, and that by psychological readjustment, fear and other benumbing tensions were dissipated, whilst deep X-ray therapy, coal tar, arsenical and other damaging medicaments were discontinued—all that will be passed over in silence.

But such silences are eloquent. They are anti-social: criminal in the truest sense of the word because they hold up knowledge which could save thousands from an agonising and premature death. HOW CANCER RESEARCH MIGHT SUCCEED I imagine the reader will agree that no body of physicists, engineers or chemists would find it beneath their dignity to investigate a constantly-recurring phenomenon simply because their theories could not account for the happening. Groups of words do not always mean what they seem to imply. All too often the phrase " spontaneous cure " is a misrepresentation to both student and patient. As we see it, any spontaneous cure of cancer is not an experience to be lightly dismissed. The scientific approach would be to uncover every detail of what the patient had done and left undone. Every move should be examined minutely in order that further spontaneous cures might be arranged for. But in medical text-books many spontaneous cures are mentioned, to be dismissed without further consideration. I believe it is because we of the Nature Cure School have studied spontaneous cures that in many cases we are able to duplicate and improve upon the circumstances and so produce similar results more or less to order. I believe that an authentic and startling advance in cancer research could come if there was less anxiety about professional dignity and more curiosity about these recurring "spontaneous cures."

CHAPTER VI COMMERCIAL COMPLICATIONS In our present state of social evolution there are features affecting health and well-being which are beyond individual control. One of my early U.S.A. patients, Upton Sinclair, asks these serious questions:— " Who furnishes the raw material for your thoughts about life? Is it honest material? . . . When is a bribe not a bribe! When is it legitimate business? . . . The spending of millions of dollars upon advertising is perfectly legitimate—it does not have the slightest effect upon editorial policy. An editorial reproducing completely the point of view of the large advertiser—that is pure coincidence."

As we all know, Upton Sinclair is a cynic, and he is speaking of the United States. It is peculiar, nevertheless, that even in Great Britain many of our foods, drinks and other commonly used products still contain dangerous organic, chemical and metallic poisons. Doubtless, many of our large food manufacturers would be only too pleased if the adventitious, hurtful material could be excluded. But this is not always true. In some instances the deleterious matter is added for the purpose of covering up some deficiency or in order to make the article more saleable. Sometimes it is added to reduce the cost of manufacture. Frequently it appears as a preservative. THE EDITORIAL GAG The awkward situation is that at present, in Great Britain, hundreds of thousands of pounds go out to encourage the consumption of harmful merchandise. Advertising is one of the great sources of revenue enjoyed by the topical Press. It would be indiscreet for an editor to hint at anything which would undermine public confidence in the goods sold by any of his large advertisers. Also, whatever the reason, those whose duty it is to prevent the abuses are either strangely silent or they are found to be strongly upholding the questionable products. We even find them publicly advocating that their use should be made compulsory! Here are a few of the commoner commercial processes and effects which are of more than passing interest to those who wish to discourage cancerous growths:— Fresh Fruit is sprayed with arsenate of lead (as are some vegetables) as a protection against moths and other insects. Small

quantities of the residue are to be found in apples and pears, and also, to a smaller extent in other fruits and vegetables. Arsenic, apparently from similar sprays, has been found in mushrooms, rice, cauliflower, cabbage, lettuce and dried fruits, as well as beef, veal and mackerel. The German writer, K. Lendrich (Bulletin of Hygiene), claims that in many samples of apples he found both arsenic and lead, but all contained arsenic. Although the amounts were small, he was not satisfied that it was safe even in these small quantities. To indicate the danger, I may quote Professor Rosenau (Preventive Medicine and Hygiene):—" Small quantities of arsenic, continued for a long period, may give rise to growths of a cancerous nature." (For the health-seeker's information I may say that the major concentration of lead and arsenic from such sprays is to be found in the stem and calyx of the apple or pear. If the fruit is quartered and the top portion of the peel—beside the stem—removed along with the core, before eating these fruits, all serious danger from this source can be avoided.) Dried Fruits are often heavily loaded with sulphur, in many forms, to " prevent discolouration and improve the appearance of the dried fruit." The principal fruits affected are apples, apricots, pears and peaches. Sulphur adds considerably to the physiological imbalance accompanying tumours and the symptoms of poisoning are given as: increase in uric acid; destruction of white corpuscles; belching of sulphur dioxide gas; inflammation of the mucosa of the mouth; pains in the teeth, accompanied by symptoms of malaise, headache, backache, nausea, albuminuria, anaemia, dull eyes and a listless manner. Yet in their text-books, dryers are told how to fumigate apricots, peaches and pears with finely-divided sulphur or the fumes of burned sulphur (sulphur dioxide). Governmental efforts in the campaign for physical fitness might be more successful if directed against the sale of such doctored foodstuffs and drinks. The Processing of Flour to render it white, first removes most of the beneficial acid-neutralising elements, and so encourages tissuesouring; then certain poisonous agents are used to bleach and

" improve " the flour. The commonest at present in use are chlorine, nitrogen trichloride and benzoyl peroxide. Please understand that these chemicals add nothing to the nutritive value of the flour. All are positively detrimental to the consumer. Their harmful effects are considerably added to by the fact that in commercial bread-making, what are called " yeast foods " are being used more and more freely. These contain potassium bromate and other injurious chemicals. It should be sufficient indication of the seriousness of the situation to mention that several of these ingredients have been banned in France and U.S.A.* In Meat, the fresh, red colour is frequently the result of a generous dosing of stale and slightly decomposed meat with sodium sulphite. This restores the colour and appearance of fresh meat and destroys the odour of putrefaction. The consumer is therefore not only encouraged to eat mildly decayed meat, but is adding to his digestive and kidney difficulties with the sulphite. SMOKED FOODS According to Professor Edwin Oakes Jordan, there is danger in preserving food by wood smoke: " the chemicals deposited . . . are of a particularly objectionable nature, and their continued ingestion may quite conceivably lead to serious injury." The commonest foods affected here are smoked bacon, ham, sausage, beef and fish. Wood smoke produces effects within the human tissues similar to those of coal tar and its derivatives. Metallic Contaminations may arise from the habit of eating tinned foods, as well as from foil-wrapped products. Lead, tin, aluminium and iron may gradually accumulate in the tissues from the use of such foods. All are conducive to the production and continuance of malignant tumours. Lead, tin and copper taints may also arise in beer, water and other liquids from piping or from being held in vessels made of or containing these metals. The cooking of food in aluminium or copper containers is likewise a source of metallic contamination. Exceedingly careful and prolonged tests made in the laboratories of the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics showed, however, that the major erosion occurred when the food was left standing in the pot after it had been cooked. * See Honest Bread, by Bertram T. Fraser, M.A., B.Sc., and C. Leslie Thomson, B.Sc.

(Clean, fresh foods, cooked in earthenware or heat-resisting glass containers, would seem to provide a defence against this danger, but cast-iron or high-grade enamel-ware both proved to be quite satisfactory as far as careful tests show. The ideal metal for pots appears to be stainless steel.)* Pasteurisation of Milk always destroys certain vital qualities. This processing prevents the quite healthy souring of milk, but it favours a slow form of putrefaction which does not seem to be so readily sensed by those who have debased their normal taste and smell by heavy smoking, drinking, or by the over-use of condiments. Very large vested interests are involved in this industry and unlimited money seems to be available for propaganda purposes. The result is that nothing antagonistic to pasteurisation is given a fair hearing. We are told that pasteurisation must be made compulsory because it preserves the milk and it is our only safeguard against tuberculosis. The facts are entirely to the contrary. The real " benefits " would appear to accrue to large distributing firms, but not to their smaller competitors. These advantages (?) are not to the consumer. They are, first, that " fresh milk " need no longer be fresh; and secondly, that stale, dirty and partly decayed milk can be sold as (legally) fresh milk. It is not what Upton Sinclair would call " honest material," but it has excellent standing in the Law Courts and with the Ministry of Food. How all this has been accomplished I cannot say, but the results of this vitiation are as would be expected by any sane person. PASTEURISED MILK KILLS CALVES For those who are desirous of getting at the facts, I shall mention merely two basic experiments:— 1. Calves fed on ordinary raw milk thrive and gain weight normally. Calves fed on pasteurised milk become sick and die. 2. 1,500 boys divided into two groups (750 in each). For a period of five years, in addition to their ordinary food, which is the same for both groups, group one received ordinary raw milk and the other pasteurised milk. In the case of the pasteurised milk group, the incidence of pulmonary tuberculosis was fourteen times greater than that of the unprocessed, raw milk group. * See Too Many Cooks.

The moral of this chapter is that all investigation of foodstuffs should be free from subsidy (open or covert) by any interested group. Until we have honest investigation and a national effort aimed at obtaining food grown in suitable soil, under healthy conditions, and delivered to the consumer fresh, uncontaminated* and free from all questionable commercial processings, it is impossible for the individual, be he physician or patient, to prevent tissue-poisoning creeping in somewhere. It is not that there is need for further expenditure in this national effort. At the present time the Government spends ample sums of money on health services, but somehow, in this field, so many efforts become sidetracked before they reach their goal. Unfortunately, also, vested interests have considerably larger sums available for propaganda and certain other subtle influences. As Mr F. V. Wells, the Editor of Soap, Perfumery and Cosmetics, says: " This country lags far behind the United States and certain of the European countries in the matter of adequate Government supervision of manufactured preparations, such as foodstuffs, patent medicines, soaps, cosmetics and toilet preparations. It is well known that some newspapers and periodicals in this country accept advertisements that would never be taken, for example, by an American publication, owing to the federal prohibition of unfounded claims."

THE SPECTACULAR APPEAL I have already shown that, as at present administered, the money subscribed by the public for cancer research is, at best, but an effort to deal with an end-result. It has been said that cancer research societies are too deeply involved and cannot now change their policy. Their present widespread public support is said to arise out of the dramatic appeal * Another danger arises where cows come in contact with D.D.T. Dr. Girardot, speaking before the Detroit Dental Society (2: 3: 50) after giving particulars of an experiment wherein every cow in a test group was killed in a six-month period merely by feeding agenized flour in place of the normal grain ration, went on to give particulars of other cows, previously sprayed with D.D.T, and later milked. The milk thus obtained was the subject of this experiment. Here is the remainder in his own words: " THE MILK KILLED THE FLIES " " Then the barn was sprayed with the milk. The milk killed the flies in the barn. No wonder the Department of Agriculture is alert for traces of D.D.T. in milk. Can anguished parents be blamed for resenting the inability of the doctor to diagnose the strange ailment of their child? "

of radium—its fabulous expensiveness, its mysterious radiations, and the well-publicised difficulties of isolation, purification, etc., etc. There is a satirical tale in metre which relates how the public loved " the ambulance down in the valley " and subscribed handsomely for its upkeep. Then a man arose and suggested that a fence around the top of the cliff would prevent all the accidents. The leaders of the people were aghast. Deprive the public of all opportunity for expression of mercy to the injured! And sympathy with the bereaved! No emergency hospital! Highly-trained technical staffs out of work! A shocked public would have none of it. So the man was lynched and the work of mercy went on. † CREDO This chapter is a plea for an inflexible, sustained and rigorous effort which could become a fence to prevent mankind from falling into the valley of degenerative disease. I believe the public could be educated to appreciate an honest effort. The loss of the emotional appeal of cancer hospitals and the drama of radium would not be irreparable. Bold diagrams and graphs showing the beginning of a downward curve appearing for the first time in the depressing figures on the last page of Chapter I, could be exhibited on hoardings, in newspapers, cinemas lectures, and so forth. With a full appreciation of the seriousness of the situation, and a knowledge of all it implies, I wish to declare, as emphatically as may be: It could be done. How success might be achieved may be indicated through a few quotations. Professor Hastings Gilford has said:— ". . . after a quarter of a century of research we can see to what a deplorable waste of energy and ability and money this academic aimless toil may lead. . . . The problem of the causation of human cancer is not to be solved by experiments on lower animals."—Lancet (25: I: 30).

IATROGENIC (DOCTOR-PRODUCED) DISEASES Dr. Ulric Williams (N.Z. Mirror, December 1937) clearly indicates why:—

† The Ambulance Down in the Valley (Kingston Edition).

" People fear disease. If they feared wrong living as whole-heartedly there would be less disease! " When symptoms present themselves, we run for advice, and those who are trying to help immediately begin an ' investigation ' in the sick bodies for the cause of the trouble. That is why it is so seldom discovered. For the causes are not in our bodies—that is where the effects are. The causes are in our methods of living—or the absence of any. " Orthodox methods, far from reducing the incidence of disease, have become in fact the second in importance of the two principal causes."

In Health and Healing in the New Age (1949) Dr. Williams has this to say on what he calls " The Cancer Industry ": In no branch of their sorrows are the people being more cruelly and treacherously deceived and imposed upon than where this horrible scourge is concerned. It is almost beyond belief that men so well-intentioned as medicalmen can be so blind. . . . We are continually reassured that early treatment by orthodox methods offers bright hope of cure; and that the proportion of cures is steadily growing. Such statements are utterly misleading. The death-rate from cancer is leaping and bounding up! Actually, apart from certain small skin sores which are not really cancers, the number of recoveries through orthodox methods is so small as to be almost non-existent. That many cases are caused by these methods, and many more are made much worse—and that at hideous cost in money and pain—is established fact . . . If anything more than the constantly and steeply soaring mortality rate were required to convince of the lamentable futility of the orthodox approach to the " cancer problem," it would be found in the reflection that, without exception, their entire armamentarium is concentrated upon trying to " cure " the growth. But cancer is not a local " disease." The growth is a local manifestation of constitutional disorder; and, like most other evidences of the disease process, can be effectually dealt with only when the cause is corrected. Also, as with most other symptoms, when the cause is corrected, often the effect exhibits an astonishing tendency to disappear. Three factors make cancer fatal: 1. Continuation of the cause. 2. Orthodox efforts to cure. 3. Fear, and mistaken belief in incurability.

From the Medical World (July 24th, 1936) came a suggestion which indicates how the vicious circle might be broken:— " Modern cancer research has failed to throw any light whatever upon the causation or treatment of the disease. This is not to be wondered at when we come to consider the utterly absurd methods used by research workers . . . It is high time that some steps were taken to discover the real reason why these are persisted in, in spite of the fact that they have yielded no results."

The italics are mine. The phrase has been emphasised because, occurring where it does, I believe there is a world of meaning behind these carefully-chosen words. Here is a statement of the work which was carried out during 1937 with some of the Government and publicly-subscribed funds. TO BE READ WITH GREAT CARE After explaining that the latest experiments are founded upon the hope that, through inoculations, antibodies may be built up within the bloodstream and from this will arise lasting protection, Time for 17th January 1938, reported:— " Dr. William Ewart Gye, director of Britain's Imperial Cancer Research Fund . . . [reports that] . . . A hen may carry a tumour, and have at the same time more than enough of the immune body in its circulating fluids to neutralise the whole of the virus in its tumour, and the tumour nevertheless continues to grow. The reason appears to be that the cancer virus takes refuge inside the body cells, where the antibody for some reason cannot penetrate. The chicken is thus in the unfortunate position of a military commander who has enough troops to wipe out an enemy if he could get them out of jail."

I advise the reader to ponder, re-read and memorise these statements. Nor is the situation any better in U.S.A. Here is part of an Editorial by Herbert M. Shelton (Hygienic Review, August, 1947):— Year after year new funds are collected. Year after year Reports are issued. But " again and again and again " they come up empty handed. The whole approach is basically false. The medical profession knows almost nothing about cancer and seems to be determined that no one else shall know anything about the subject.

Meanwhile we should care for the healthy. That is where real cure begins. (Darbishire, ref. p. 21). Health is not to be found hidden among the end-products of disease.

CHAPTER VII SOME NOTES FOR PRACTITIONERS AND HOME TREATMENT DIETETICS Positive: The aim here is to allow the normal nervous controls to regain their authority. Nutrition is invariably disturbed, and soured tissues (acidosis) must be restored to a sweet and wholesome condition. Of primary importance to this end are the fresh, green, leafy vegetables, which the patient must learn to chew with very great thoroughness. Deep breathing is a remarkable help toward a full appreciation and enjoyment of natural foods, as well as encouraging normal digestion, assimilation and elimination. Sun-baths, natural and artificial, make for increased utilisation of the cleansing salts, and so restore normal action to a debased bloodstream. Because of the frequently-cultivated bad habits of starch or meat excess in feeding, it may be necessary to discontinue all food for a short spell. In many serious cases, once normal assimilation has been restored, a period of quite uncooked foods, such as vegetable salads, fruits and raw milk, may be advisable until the immediate danger has passed. Gradually this can be merged into a normal Nature Cure diet as the health improves. The dietary is outlined in Food for Health: The Kingston Recipes. Negative: Fasting may be dangerous if carried beyond the period necessary to relieve the depurative organs and the congested lymphatics. Whenever natural hunger manifests itself, it is better to supply natural foods to restore normal balance, but food should not be forced with the idea of making up lost weight. There is often difficulty with on-lookers here, particularly in the early stages of cure. But it should be obvious that the less bodily tissue there is to keep clean, the less work is required from the cleansing organs, therefore the greater the margin of safety. Above all, the chronic patient must eliminate from his dietary air tea, coffee, and the rapidly-decaying foods such as fish and chicken. The same caution applies to boiled and pasteurised milk. Starches should be kept at a minimum. HYDROTHERAPY Positive: A favourite saying of Dr. Lindlahr's was: " There is no such thing as a cure-all; if there was, it would be cold water properly

applied." The cold compress is the most useful hydropathic method for home application, but, under ordinary circumstances, it is essential that any local compress should be accompanied by one on the body or waist. This to encourage normal kidney, liver, adrenal and bowel action. Negative: Hot compresses and hot water bottles applied over the seat of discomfort may give relief, but often they do considerable damage. Any hot application should be applied only on the instructions of a fully-trained Naturopath. Likewise with local cold compresses. Whilst the waist or body compress is generally safe, a purely local application may encourage the formation of local fontanelles. Not only are these usually unpleasant, but they may be disfiguring and dangerous. MANIPULATION All lesions which affect the tumour area or the alimentary tract should receive first attention. Muscular relaxation may be a great relief in painful conditions. As a rule it is well not to encourage further activity in the tumour itself, but manipulation and passive movements should be designed to drain thoroughly the surrounding areas. Manipulation of spinal nerves to stimulate normal activities in the kidneys, liver, skin and lungs, should be applied according to the patient's physical condition. Naturally, it is not advisable to give local manipulative attention if secondaries have formed within any of these organs. A general encouragement of the digestive organs and the circulation is always a safe procedure. Increased alkalinity, arising out of better digestion and assimilation of a balanced diet, makes for more controlled nervous responses and rapid encystment of any growths which cannot be discharged or reabsorbed. MENTAL Positive : No matter how sick a man may be, if he has some urgent ambition—something which he considers not only of great importance, but something which he alone must do, such a patient may be counted upon to overcome almost any physical disability. Therefore, the encouragement of ambition in a patient may be of the greatest therapeutic value. The ideal patient is the one who simply must get well in order to do something—that is always a hopeful

sign. The patient who has nothing to live for is the typically incurable patient—no matter what the name of the condition. Negative: It is important to clear away fear and hatred: every sort of fear—fear of microbes, fear of operations, and, all too often, fear of life and its responsibilities. The emotionally religious type of patient is frequently torn with family, sectarian and economic hatreds, which prevent any advance towards recovery. Hatreds, which a generation ago would have been sectarian, are to-day becoming much more openly moved into the economic field. The ideal treatment here is impossible—outwith the physician's province—but much can be done—apart from attempts at clearing up special difficulties—by arousing within the patient an impulse to do something for the sake of helping some one, or for the sheer joy of doing it. Where intense feelings exist because of civil conditions, individual fears have to be studied and solved, each as a separate problem. If the patient works up desire for revenge, it is usually practicable to coax his thoughts and ambitions back to the worthwhile things he, as an individual, has done and hopes to accomplish in the future. . . . IN ORDER TO DO SOMETHING By exceedingly careful handling, group hatreds may even be turned to a good purpose. Encourage the man who hates people because of political or economic conditions, to ponder how he would put things right if he had the power. That is for many the first step towards High Level Health. The most potent therapeutic forces come into action when the patient's own desire is to be well in order to do something constructive. When everything in the patient's being is subordinated to that end, health attainment becomes a practical possibility, even in most desperate cases. To that extent George Eliot's thought regarding Justice may be made to apply to Health " It is not without us as a fact; it is within us as a great yearning." * * * * * It is all too easy to cure hypothetical cases, so most of the

evidence offered in the quoted correspondence later in this volume deals with two exceptionally well authenticated cases, wherein the " spontaneous cures " were carried out after the gravest stage had been reached.

LATER DEVELOPMENTS A BROKEN PROMISE The original edition of this book from this point onward contained copies of much explosive correspondence which arose out of Sir Kingsley Wood's unpractical attitude to his apparently sincere, and by all accounts, moving broadcast appeal for cancer research. Many dozens of our patients who had personally experienced cures and people who had evidence of what had been done for relatives so afflicted, had written to Sir Kingsley, pointing out this promising line of investigation. In practice his personal promise (" to leave no stone unturned to solve the problem of cancer ") turned into a routine repudiation " The Minister . . . is not disposed to take special action." Naturally this volte face produced great irritation, and the selection of letters herewith is probably a fair sample of the correspondence with which he must have been inundated. The copies of these letters came to me from those who felt they had been sadly let down. A WISE PRECAUTION The first letter, however, had nothing to do with Sir Kingsley's promise. It came from a patient who, having escaped a major surgical operation by Nature Cure treatment, had been refused compensation by his insurance company although he held a very full " Sickness and Accident " policy. Had he undergone the operation the whole of his expenses—nursing home, surgeon's fees, etc.—would have been met without question! His letter concludes:— " This decision is contrary to the spirit and letter of the benefits provided . . . I certainly had an ' unforeseen, dangerous illness,' but that is their decision and I am appealing against it. " You will be glad to know that I am progressing and feeling very fit. Nature Cure has done the job, and if I may say so, has done it exceedingly well."

At our request, the following excellent advice was given by an insurance consultant who is a friend of our movement:— " For my own part, I am at a loss to understand why any insurance company should be hostile to Nature Cure practitioners, who in reality are their very best friends. Many of these companies are, in my own knowledge, to-day collecting premiums on policies which would undoubtedly have been death claims years

ago but for Nature Cure methods. One would imagine that the sheer ' hard cash ' aspect of this matter would have induced the companies to examine before rejecting. Some of the better-managed of them are gradually thinking so for themselves. " My own feeling, based on the limited information before me, is that you should not give up hope of a recovery. The last thing any insurance company wants is to get publicity in contesting a reasonable claim—it is very damaging . . . I have succeeded in getting the ——— (Insurance Company), one of the largest in the city, to accept the Certificate of a member of the Incorporated Society of Registered Naturopaths. " I would advise all those who contemplate taking up a sickness policy or sickness and accident policy, before completing the proposal, to insist that the certificate of a registered Nature Cure practitioner be accepted as evidence of sickness or incapacity, for claim purposes. " No doubt some offices may resist, but the condition has already been conceded by some of the largest companies."

For all Nature Cure patients who are contemplating taking out a sickness or accident policy, the moral would appear to be: make certain that no clause occurs which would enforce medical or surgical treatment as an alternative to loss of benefit. Now that our civil servants are to wield supreme authority over our accident and sickness compensations it behoves us to be doubly alert to resent what Lord Hewart might have called their " absentminded abuse of power." Whether Sir Kingsley's Christmas appeal for funds was successful I do not know. I heard nothing of it until weeks after it was delivered, but it must have been a moving oration because many of our patients wrote him suggesting Nature Cure as a solution to the cancer problem. Soon I began to receive letters from these adherents who had believed that the Minister was genuinely distressed and would welcome information about possible cures. Unfortunately to all these correspondents had gone out only a formal acknowledgement that the Minister was aware " of the claims made by and on behalf of Mr James C. Thomson " and " he is not disposed to take any special action." With the majority that reply appears to have closed the episode. In one case, however, the recipient became very angry. He sent me the complete dossier of his letters and the Minister's replies.

INVESTIGATION INVITED . . . Here is his first letter:— To Sir Kingsley Wood, Minister of Health. Northumberland. 8th January, 1938. Dear Sir, In thinking over your appeal on behalf of sufferers from cancer, I feel compelled to write and put before you the case of my mother. It may, perhaps, do some good with regard to a thorough investigation. The facts are as follows:—My mother in 1925 was pronounced as incurable by doctors in Harley Street, and was only given a very short time to live. Her health was such that an operation was out of the question. We had heard of Nature Cure, which was effecting some astonishing cures both for cancer and other ailments. My mother decided to go to Edinburgh and take up treatment. After some months she was decidedly better and was able to live for twelve years in comparative bodily comfort. Millions are being spent for research work. Why not look into this? I most strongly urge you to make a most exhaustive investigation into this entirely commonsense treatment. I am, etc.

. . . AND REFUSED The reply he received from the M.o.H. read:—" The Minister . . . is not disposed to take special action. . . ." Quite undaunted by this repulse he sent a further synopsis of his mother's case along with particulars of others known to him. Again he received the routine answer, and again he sent more information. When a third repetition of that " by and on behalf of " defence came back to him he lost all patience. To Sir Kingsley he sent a manto-man statement marked " Personal and confidential." The phrases I like best ran as follows:— " I resent your statement that I made a plea on behalf of James C. Thomson. . . . My thought was for the untold thousands of cancer patients who are, at this moment, suffering unbearable and unnecessary agonies while you break a solemn promise made in your Christmas message when you asked for funds for cancer research. . . ."

No reply was received from Sir Kingsley.

A DOCTOR WRITES Here are two letters which explain themselves:— To Sir Kingsley Wood, Minister of Health. University Club, Edinburgh. 31st January, 1938. Dear Sir, You announced recently in a Cancer Research Appeal that you intended to leave no stone unturned which would lead to the solving of the problem of cancer. Presuming on this statement, may I bring the following to your notice? I have been engaged in the practice of medicine for twenty years, and the question of malignancy has always interested me intensely. In following up the results of cancer cases both in practice and in hospitals, these results following operation. X-ray or radium therapy can only be described as disappointing—a fact borne out by statistics. I found that in Edinburgh there is a School engaged in the treatment of disease on new lines and with remarkable results, even in cases of advanced malignancy. I then found myself in the position of having, a year ago, to put my theories to the test. I discovered that I was suffering from carcinoma (a form of cancer). . . . In Edinburgh I underwent treatment in the School of Natural Therapeutics, with the result that I have steadily improved in health; the growth has become encapsulated and is shrinking, and I feel more convinced than ever that cancer can be cured. If you are interested, I shall hold myself in readiness to furnish further data. I am, etc.

This doctor received the routine letter from the M.o.H., part of which is reproduced on the Frontispiece. The operative part of the reply being: " The Minister . . . is not disposed to take special action." NO REPLY Here is another instructive letter from the Glasgow patient:— 4th March, 1938. Dear Sir, As a result of your Christmas broadcast I wrote you giving full particulars of my case . . . as I have received no acknowledgment of my letter I imagine it must have gone astray.

I am therefore taking the liberty of repeating the principal points . . . in the hope that they may be of use to you in your investigation. 1. In May, 1932, at the age of 62, my condition was diagnosed as cancer of the mouth. After two spells of radium treatment . . . the pain had become unbearable (I had no pain before the radium was applied). When I was asked to come in for a third course of treatment I could not bear the pain any more and decided against the radium as the consulting surgeon admitted that he had lost all faith in it. 2. Through friends I had heard of cures performed at the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics. . . . At that time everything I took seemed to make the agony worse, and my state of mind was such that I did not care whether I lived or died.* After my first treatment I began to experience relief, and in two weeks' time I was free from pain. From that time I began to improve rapidly, and in a few months I was able to resume work. 3. My work to-day is strenuous. Not only do I supervise my own business, but I am on the road every working day and do as much work in that way as any of my own travellers. This is wearing work, averaging between ten to eleven hours daily, and I think it is fairly good indication of my present condition when I tell you that I now finish my day's work as fresh as I used to be twenty years ago. 4. . . . Since my cure in Edinburgh I have not had one single day's illness, and scarcely a week passes but some one remarks upon my healthy appearance. Three years ago I resumed my former recreation of swimming and diving in the early mornings, and recently I have been able to play a hard game of badminton and keep my end up against young players of from seventeen to twenty-five. I think you must admit that the cure in my case was very satisfactory, even although I had got to a very low state. In my previous letter I offered to let you have any further details you wished, and I still hold myself ready. . . . I am sure it would repay your department to investigate the work being done by the Edinburgh School of Natural Therapeutics. I am, etc.

That final letter constitutes an almost complete synopsis of our findings. First the radium (or X-ray) closely related to unbearable pain and then the irrepressible joy of living which is the commonest discovery of our chronic patients after a genuine cure. Note well that joyous phrase: " and keep my end up against young players." These are some of the things we have in mind when we use the word " cure." High Level Health is vastly more than a mere absence of symptoms. It implies a full, constructive and exuberant joy of living. * The day before N.C. took over, his housekeeper had been warned : " Three days at most."

A MEETING WITH STUDENTS . . . The cure of that Glasgow patient created somewhat of a sensation among certain final year medical students at Glasgow University. To find a " three days at most " case walking about in excellent health was most disturbing to their philosophy. Some had gone to their lecturers and professors asking for an explanation. Naturally none was forthcoming. As one of them put it to me: " We soon saw that the professors did not know how it was done." After a good deal of discussion the students asked if I would give them a lunch-interval lecture on " Nature Cure and Cancer "—twenty minutes to state my case and ten minutes to answer questions. Although protesting that twenty minutes would cramp my style, I accepted the invitation. The meeting went very well. Questions poured into such an extent that we were still going strong after three and a half hours. Then, because of other engagements, I had to break off. Before leaving I was taken to the Committee room and told that every one was delighted; that the information I had given them was exactly what they had wanted. Would I come back in three weeks and submit myself to another session? This was agreed, and I left amid much hand shaking, etc. A few days later I received a letter from their secretary. They were not to be allowed to have me speak again as arranged. The whole committee had been called before the Senatus where it had been explained that never again must they invite a non-medical person to speak on any subject involving health or disease. So with many apologies, etc., etc. The sad part about that episode lies in the fact that these apparently alert and eager lads accepted that direction without question. . . . AND ITS SEQUEL—A LEGAL TRAP But that was not the end of the story. Apparently the great men had been deeply offended. If the professors did not know, they were determined that no one else was to be told. One of my cancer patients, well-placed in Edinburgh University circles, warned me that strings were being pulled: I was to be put out of business. Luckily he was able to inform me how the trap was being baited. A very

powerful inner circle had drawn up a scheme which ran somewhat as follows. Nominally we were to be prosecuted for conducting a nursing home without a licence. In reality the appeal was to be made to professional prejudices. Emphasis was to be placed upon the fact that we were treating cancer without medical control or supervision. But their carefully planned scheme went agley. Indeed it became one of Edinburgh's minor medico-legal fiascos. The early stages had gone well. According to plan, they were able to prove decisively that we had treated patients who were critically ill, suffering from various malignant growths. Next they proved that not a single medical man had attended upon these invalids after they came into our hands. Then quite suddenly they found they had proved too much! Old patients of ours had innocently admitted that years before, after having been declared hopelessly incurable by leading specialists, they had gone over to Nature Cure. They also agreed that during the whole treatment there had been no medical supervision. As we saw it—and luckily for us, as our Judge realised—the mere attendance of these patients in Court, now freed from all disease, constituted a complete and perfect answer to the implications of our critics. Each of these witnesses in turn stood up in the witness box, a living example of Walt Whitman's postulate: " I and my kind, we convince by our presence." Various details of that hearing have been produced elsewhere (Nature Cure for the Beginner and Two Health Problems: Constipation and Our Civilisation) and even in Parliament, so I shall not go into them further. However, one item may be of interest. The medical doctor (the case mentioned a few pages previously) who had received excellent results from our attention gave this evidence:— " From my own experience I find that usually members of the medical profession are hostile to nature cure ideas . . . not so much with young medical practitioners . . . [but] . . . the specialists are very hostile. . . ." Witness added that an English specialist had been annoyed . . . Mr Thomson— " Was he annoyed because you were still alive? "— " I had no right to be alive. I had not played the game with him." (Laughter.) —Scotsman (18:5: 40).

Altogether a poor day for the clever political doctors and their legal collaborators.

CAUTIONARY Not for one moment would I wish the reader to believe that by Nature Cure techniques a complete cure can be produced at any time, or in any patient whose condition happens to be diagnosed as cancer, tuberculosis, arterio-sclerosis, pernicious anaemia, or other chronic disease. In the early stages all " diseases " are readily amenable to control through adjustment of habits, feeding, posture, attention to weakened areas by remedial exercises, and so forth. Even at the final, desperate stages we do sometimes score a dramatic success, but that is the wrong place to begin. In every case we have to depend upon intelligent co-operation from our patient, and the healthier a man is the more rapidly should all adaptations occur. Unfortunately we seldom enjoy the opportunity of applying our teachings at an early stage. The superstition that doctors and their drugs " cure " is still strong upon our people. Accordingly it is usually as a last resort that the Nature Cure practitioner is called in. As I write my next consultation was to have been a visit to a cancer patient for the first time. Now a telephone message has arrived to say that it is too late—the patient has died. That is a common experience, and incidentally, so long as patients die before we see them, we usually escape blame. OUR FAILURES But not otherwise. No matter how seriously ill the patient may be; no matter how many medical doctors and consultants have said there is no hope; even if the patient is moribund when first seen by us; should he die within minutes or months, years or decades thereafter, our opponents loudly proclaim that we are responsible. Another aspect arises with old cases. Within the past month, two of our older patients have died. Both had taken up Nature Cure after refusing major operations for cancer, 32 and 35 years ago. In both cases their passing was quite painless, but likewise in both cases there was a final flare up of a long-quiescent tumour. As seen by the medicals, therefore, they both died of cancer. In every such case we are held to have failed. Everything that occurred in the interval is dismissed as of no importance. No matter the years of active and constructive life, free from pain and discomfort. Not a thought that meanwhile these individuals had been

useful members of their communities. The public is still woefully misled by that perverted nonsense called " the science of diagnosis." WHY GERMS ARE POPULAR As one of the most observant and outspoken of reformed medical practitioners has said:— Germs are the cause of all diseases; diphtheria germs are found in the throat of a child suffering from ulceration, therefore the germs caused the disease. The same germs are found in the throats of other children who are well; evidently they are immune, notwithstanding that they never had the disease. Therefore the germs are the cause of the immunity in these children. I want to go on record as one saying . . . that so-called Medical Science, as practiced to-day, is a fallacy from beginning to end. The Christian prays to God to cure without the sick man being troubled to leave off his disease-provoking habits; the doctor gives a drug to cure the patient in spite of his inebriating habits. Both practice atheism without knowing it. Reasoning must be shallow indeed in any individual who cannot see that health cannot return until disease-producing habits are discontinued. " What is a system of diagnosis and treatment worth which is founded on causes which are in truth effects? For example, they remove a tumour, or extirpate a lymphatic gland, or tonsil, or adenoid, without a thought that these growths are organised effects that cannot possibly come into existence without a cause: which cause remains just as active as before the operation. . . . The medical profession spends most of its time treating symptoms of its own making. How can this intensive farming of delusions yield truth? —J. H. Tilden, M.D. (Health Critique and Guide).

Perhaps the best commentary comes from that other experienced medical practitioner, Dr. Ulric Williams, the original " Radio Doctor," of New Zealand: Medical " science " is not healing disease. Do we ever see cancer, tuberculosis, eczema, anaemia, paralysis, goitre, osteomyelitis, epilepsy, asthma, neurosis, insanity, or even the common cold healed by medical " science "? We do not. Medical so-called " science " is nothing but an arduous way of converting acute illnesses into chronic disease. . . . No one has ever been cured of cancer by surgery, and nobody ever will; though victims climb over each other for the privilege of being exterminated by what one hospital matron described as " the senseless butchery that goes on in our operating theatres. . . ." Radium, X-rays, and surgery are nothing but clumsy, illogical, expensive and painful . . . techniques for shortening life and increasing misery.—Reality (16:5:47).

WHAT HAPPENED AFTERWARDS? Nothing exposes so mercilessly the fundamental weaknesses in any alleged cure as does the passage of time. Accordingly, let us see what has happened in the intervening years to the two heroes of this book. The doctor-patient who spoke up so courageously in 1940 (referred to a few pages previously) died in 1944 as the result of an accident. At the post-mortem investigation the pathologist testified that he had found not the slightest trace of cancer. In medical circles five years is the standard test of " cure." The pathologist's evidence was given seven years after the completion of our treatment. His discovery agrees with our own findings in this case and in thousands of others. The repercussions from that pathologist's report (according to the newspapers his not altogether sympathetic words were " It was not cancer and it never had been ") expose a remarkable confusion of thought in certain circles. By some peculiar process of reasoning his finding was taken as a sweeping victory for orthodox medicine. Forthwith we were informed that the pathologist's verdict (A) completely disposed of all our claims and (B) just as completely it exonerated the medical and surgical specialists. But look at the facts. With a background of many years of treating for, operating on, and lecturing upon all forms of cancer, this patient made a personal diagnosis of carcinoma. Then came a series of visits to the leading authorities in Britain. Quite independently and without any one of them knowing that any other practitioner was involved, each of the eight diagnosed an advanced carcinoma and in no single instance was any hope of cure held out. WHOSE DIAGNOSIS? On the other hand, as is our usual practice, I gave no name to the condition, but at our very first meeting I informed the patient of my opinion. My belief was that with proper handling the growth could be reabsorbed satisfactorily, and that is precisely what happened. As I see it the pathologist's report leaves no loophole for the profession. According to their own teachings, either (1) the cure was complete and altogether satisfactory or (2) their leaders in this field must be hopelessly incompetent.

My own impression is that these aspects—(1) and (2) above—are not mutually exclusive: both could be true. Either way we have nothing to grumble about. Everything we had worked for had been achieved and, if considered as a test case, our theories and work had been confirmed to the present limits of human possibility. We could not have asked for more. Any problems brought up by the pathologist belong exclusively to the profession. Here is the evidence as given by the doctor-patient under oath:— " I consulted eight of Britain's leading specialists, and I was condemned to have a very major operation. It was also suggested that I should undergo radium treatment, and treatment by deep X-ray therapy. It is now over three years since I had that advice. " I underwent none of these treatments, but had Nature Cure treatment by Mr Thomson. One year exactly after I was seen by the specialists I had a consultation with Mr Shaw, who is head of the Cancer Research Department for Scotland and he said there was absolutely no evidence of malignancy." — Scotsman (18:5:40). (My italics.)

The doctor-patient, being familiar with the whole problem from an orthodox viewpoint, had travelled all over Britain with growing despair to consult the accepted authorities in each area. Only after these widely-dispersed local pundits had given their several depressing, but entirely unequivocal verdicts, had the routine first approach been made to Nature Cure. In Edinburgh the early consultant had been Mr Shaw. That is why his later finding was crucial. Diametrically opposed, as it was, to his previous opinion, it testified to the complete success which had attended upon the N.C. techniques even with this excessivelysponsored, but desperately serious condition. The Glasgow patient referred to previously is now 83, but still passably fit and active. When he last reported (March 1953) he was in great form; " not one day off work in 20 years." Just as can be sensed in his letter he continues to enthuse over the satisfactory state of his health. THEIR STRANGELY-RESTRICTED SEARCHINGS Little more need be said. Perhaps some day the " Cancer Campaign " directors may stop imitating the drunk man who had lost half-a-crown. A kindly policeman who found him groping about under a street lamp, first helped him to look for it, and then asked:

" Are you sure you lost it here?" " Oh no," said the drunk, smilingly, '' I lost it round the corner, but there's more light here." A technique is not necessarily sensible because it is longestablished. Every psychologist knows that it is possible to grow old without growing up. To grow up mentally, we must discard Santa Claus, fairies and Authorities. The daily use of our own reasoning powers is the only sure way toward intellectual integrity and mental maturity. As Professor Charles Richet (L'Homme Stupide) noticed, " Genius and stupidity are not incompatibles." Somewhat the same thought must have been in the mind of Paracelsus some 400 years ago when he declared, just before his assassination:— "The best physicians are the ones who do the least harm . . . the patient has good cause to rejoice if the medicines administered do him no serious harm and do not prevent his recovery. Unfortunately there are some who have learned so much that their learning has driven out all their ability to reason. " Neither emperors nor popes, colleges nor high schools can evolve a physician. They can confer privileges and cause a person who is not a physician to appear as if he were one: they can give him permission to kill, but they cannot enable him to cure the sick."

PAIN AND EUTHANASIA Our discovery is that chronic disease, like pain, disappears when it is no longer required. As soon as we begin to do the things that are indicated as urgent by the placing—in space of time—of the symptom or group of symptoms, they fade away. The present agitation, for and against euthanasia would lose all meaning if drug doctors could be induced to teach the purpose of pain instead of poisoning their patients with medicaments. If the drugged person is to live, his tissues must insist upon the pain being recognised so that the cause of it may be stopped. Hence the vicious circle which arises. As the drugs get stronger the pains increase until both doctor and patient are inclined to accept euthanasia as the only solution. Not until the majority of our health (?) advisers stop " treating " symptoms, fighting " diseases " and attending " cases " can we hope for real advance. Until then it still must remain true that " it is the nearest, plainest and simplest principles that learned men see last." One of the oldest and wisest of principles is implicit in the original interpretation of the word cure: curiosity about, and care for the healthy.

Having finished this dissertation, the first letter I open is a request for a consultation. Here is the opening paragraph: " Dear Sir,—A friend and neighbour of mine, Mrs ——, visited Kingston as a patient, last February. After being given two weeks to live by at least one medical practitioner at that time, her present condition is astonishing, even to my untrained eye. " The enclosed brief medical history makes it very plain that I, myself, am in great need. . . ."

Fair enough. On the implications behind that oft-repeated request (63,000 times to date) I rest my case. (Up to this point, the book is much as it appeared in its original form, the only changes made have been in relation to topical events which are no longer apropos and to bring events, figures and reports more up-to-date. The new matter that follows is designed to clarify certain points and to provide case histories which I trust may have a special interest for newcomers to the Nature Cure idea.)

DISCUSSION POINTS—Q. & A.

DISCUSSION GROUP—STUDENTS AND PATIENTS—ON THE LAWN AT KINGSTON

HOW MANY CURES? I listened to a discussion on the Nature Cure treatment of cancer, during which one critic alleged that you always refused to give statistics or to allow medical investigation of your cures. If these allegations are accurate, could we have some idea of the reasons behind your apparent shyness?—M.B., Bournemouth. My good friend, Dr. D. B. Armstrong, V.P. in charge of health work for the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. in New York, comments as follows:— ". . . Thanks for sending your most interesting article. The evidence for normal agriculture is most impressive. We think your clinical data is not very convincing because of the small statistical base "—which is a fair comment. Could you from your angle send me any data on the Kingston Clinic supplementary to what I got there myself from patients—i.e., could you add to what I have already for use in my book, on people cured by diet, etc., at the Kingston Clinic? If so it would be much appreciated.—J.P., Boston, U.S.A. These apparently simple questions would call for reams of foolscap for a fairly complete answer. First we must clear away the many assumptions implicit in the wording. So long as the medical theories about health, disease and cure are accepted, and if the answers must fit into that frame of reference, clean-cut reasoning is excluded. That unspoken proviso means that we can give no easy answer because firstly, we see as falsely based the whole structure of medical reasoning; and secondly, because apart from strictly medical concepts and classifications (and of " cures ") there could be no unequivocal tabulation. If statistics are to have any reasonable meaning, we must be able to sort out the material into comparable groups, so that we may make lists and calculate percentages, etc., of the items falling into this or that category. But how are we to compare two cases like the following? First consider Tommy's utterly unfrightened and wholly undamaged mental and physical condition after his simple stomach ache has been treated at home by his calm and unruffled mother. Against that, now compute (statistically) the ultimate state of another Tommy after he has been professionally treated for a similar ache, having been panicked by some frightened onlooker, undergone a most grave diagnosis, and then rushed off by ambulance and plane to undergo an emergency operation in unfamiliar and alarming

surroundings. The experience may leave him pale, worn and enervated; more or less permanently deranged in mind and body. Yet in orthodox literature quite commonly just such a tragedy is exhibited as a " wonder cure ": a life saved, so it is said, by some new surgical technique. So, on paper, it becomes a triumph of surgery— an added unit to convince a sadly uncritical and gullible public. In reality there can be no more statistical relationship, between these two " cures " than is to be found between 2 o'clock in the afternoon and 2 ozs. of margarine. I bring up this point early, and I would stress that probably 99.9% of all genuine cures pass unmarked and indeed unnoticed by the medical practitioner or layman. Such is the marvellous efficiency of a healthy body. It does a streamlined, complete and rapid job, that needs no dramatic and emergency aid. Accordingly there just is nothing to go into any column of figures. MISLEADING STATISTICS But through generations of false doctrines (and doctorings), such is our perversely twisted way of looking at things, that only more or less completely botched and bungled cases are reported and tabulated—and then almost always in the wrong category. The result is unrelieved chaos. Practically every genuine cure passes unseen and unsung. Meanwhile the botched cases that survive for even the shortest of periods, no matter in what crippled and tortured state the patient may be, are paraded as positive proof of the successes scored by the latest fashionable modality. Each is claimed as a triumph for this or that operation, irradiation or medication. For its brief moment, each becomes an accepted and resounding success. The strange and ever-recurring wonder is the smoothness of its passing. Without fireworks it is quietly forgotten as we are deafened by the hysterical screams of delight which usher in the next " Great Medical Discovery." In Any Change is Progress, Seaté makes one of his characters respond to a medical specialist: " You ask me What is Truth? But, my dear fellow, first you must tell me which day of the month you have in mind."

MANY SYMPTOMS, ONE DISEASE After more than fifty years experience, Dr. J. H. Tilden wrote:— " After years of floundering in the great sea of medical and surgical speculation to find the causes of so-called " diseases ", all I could find was that all of the people were sick part of the time, a part of the people were sick all of the time, but, glory be, all of the people were not sick all of the time. Some people got well under my treatment and friends would say that I cured them; others died and friends would say that Providence removed them. I knew that I did not cure those who got well, and I did not like to acknowledge, even to myself, that I had killed those who died. . . . " It took a long time to evolve out of the conventional idea of many diseases into the truth that there is but one disease, and that the four hundred catalogued so-called diseases are but different manifestations of toxaemia "—blood and tissue uncleanliness.

A truth which enables any unscrupulous (or unimaginative) statistician to bring forth on paper any desired proportion of " diseases " and " cures ".* HEREDITY Unfortunately there are several not readily controllable factors in this field. A major one occurs in certain families wherein a bias toward degenerative disease appears to have been built up through several generations. The unlucky present descendant is liable to drift into what we may describe as a malignant maelstrom: destructive beyond anything that could be foreseen so long as attention is restricted to the individual involved (i.e., apart from the health habits and life histories of his ancestors). That looks biologically unfair where the general way of life of the present-day individual has been reasonably conducted. Unless the parents of such a person have realised the bias likely to be woven into his flesh, and taken appropriate precautions early, the sins of the fathers are liable to produce serious manifestations at any stage from quite early years through to old age. FALSE PREMISE Which brings me to quite a blatant piece of propaganda, used to distract public attention from a hard fact. Repeatedly we read that * Even that apparently simple word " cure " requires much study. It has a complex background that makes a full understanding by the layman almost impossible. (Interested readers are referred to a full discussion on this aspect in Nature Cure for the Beginner).

because people are living longer in our time, the great and steadily increasing death-rate from cancer is not so alarming as it seems. It is more apparent than real. Cancer, so we are told, is essentially a disease of old age, and proportionately as well as in the aggregate there are more old people alive to-day than ever before. BABIES NOW INVOLVED The glaring and carefully ignored fact that is constantly by-passed is that the cancer rate is increasing for all ages, but especially among young people. As many readers will know, quite tiny infants to-day are dying of cancer in their cradles. Personally I would place the responsibility on the shoulders of the drug houses and their agents, the drug doctors, along with the food manipulating firms. So far as I can judge these are the two major groups responsible for this most disturbing new development. A large factor of uncertainty arises because the most fantastic profits are made by the industries which live upon disease and war. The great chemical cartels are involved in both, and their influence spreads far afield. They spend millions annually on " educating " the public into an acceptance of war and disease as inexorable. Recently Ralph Wightman received a great ovation when he suggested that to make money out of war should be illegal. I would go further; I would include disease. But such laws are impossible. Representatives of the cunning men who draw enormous incomes from these evils, congest the Universities, Medical Schools and Parliaments of the " civilised " world. There are statistical and other specialists who make an excellent living through their ability to manipulate figures so that they fit the nomenclature of various symptoms to meet the needs of their sponsors. The connection between the statisticians and their patrons is seldom aboveboard: usually it is a carefully concealed relationship. The accepted " authority " commonly masquerades as a lecturer or professor at some leading University, or even as Principal of a College. The salaries and other emoluments may be wholly paid by the combine for which he works, but such a fact is seldom mentioned in public. Even when it is discovered and exposed the Managing Directors of the groups engaged in this pollution of the pure fount of learning are almost certain to be highly honoured for their magnificent support of the higher education. It has happened!

CHEMISTS IN CONTROL Lord Horder spoke better than he knew when he complained: " Formerly the chemist was the servant of the doctor: to-day he tends to become the doctor's master." It is, of course, true that there are occasional instances of disinterested University Readers, etc., who are merely the innocent tools of more cunning men. As A. J. Cummings truly remarks:— " The gullibility of professors outside their own spheres of knowledge would be surprising if it were not such a common experience."

Nature Cure readers should memorise the point so well made by Major Douglas in his Monopoly of Credit:— The control of publicity renders it easy to circumscribe the reputation of the unorthodox. Modern organised publicity in its various forms is a product of costly machinery and is controlled by financial mechanism, so that in general any information circulated through such agencies is orthodox, while any authority recognised and advertised is a witness for the defence of things as they are, or as those at present in control of finance would desire them to be. Education, publicity, and organised intelligence (in the sense in which the word " intelligence " is used in military circles) can be controlled, first to minimise the likelihood of criticism arising, and should it arise, depriving it of all the normal facilities for effective action. Finance can, and does control policy, and as has been well said by an American writer, Charles Ferguson, " control of credit and control of news are concentric."

Elsewhere Douglas mentions that what we have to remember is that all the brains in the world which can be bought with money are at the disposal of Big Business and the Financial Groups. (Quoted from memory.) In this country the laws of libel discourage exposure of the more corrupt practices—provided they are being carried out by the right people. So we must go across the Atlantic for a clear picture of how it is done. (Not that we have anything to boast of apart from our more precision-developed legal machinery, apparently designed to ensure that such truths shall not readily escape into the public prints within these islands. See Tait Bequest item at the end of this book.) GOVERNMENT MEN IN U.S.A. In a statement issued from the Lee Foundation of Nutritional Research, Milwaukee, Wis., U.S.A., Dr. Royal Lee draws attention to a battle which is going on between those who are trying to pass

information to the public about better nutrition and the food manufacturers " who insist on making products worse so that they can be sold for less." By that technique they are able to undersell their more honest competitors who find it difficult to resist a corresponding lowering of standards if they are to remain in business. Dr. Lee notes that these questionable commercial interests " have the United States government on their side " (such an innocent phrase!) ever since they were able to oust Dr. Harvey W. Wiley (an incorruptible and self-respecting official, brashly frank about unwholesomeness in high places) from his job as head of the Food and Drug Administration in 1912. The present head of the Food and Drug Division of Nutrition, a Dr. Elmer M. Nelson, is more easygoing. This gentleman, in a Special Constitutional Court in Washington, October 1949, calmly testified to this effect: " It is wholly unscientific to state that a well fed body is more able to resist disease than an ill fed body. My overall opinion is that there hasn't been enough experimentation to prove dietary deficiencies make one more susceptible to disease." (Washington Post, 26: 10: 49).

FOOD FAKERS ARE PROTECTED According to Dr. Lee that kind of testimony is no novelty for Dr. Nelson. Some years earlier he, supported by a group of experts, had testified in a similar court that neither degenerative disease, infectious disease nor functional disease could result from any nutritional deficiency! Naturally every newspaper played up to its big advertisers by printing that comforting piece of evidence. Dr. Lee continues:— Truly as Dr. Wiley sadly remarked in his book The History of a Crime Against the Pure Food Law (1930) the makers of unfit foods have taken possession of Food and Drug enforcement and have reversed the effect of the law, protecting the criminals that adulterate food instead of protecting the public health.

In America the truth has been suppressed in more subtle ways than by framed prosecutions. Not only Dr. Wiley's book above, but the three revealing publications of Alfred M'Cann (The Science of Eating, The Science of Keeping Young, and Starving America) have

all been suppressed by unscrupulous use of the Copyright Law. Since the death of Wiley and M'Cann copyright ownership has passed into other hands, and complete suppression is the result. Despite these powerful supports, the drug manufacturers and food manipulators have not been without their set-backs and difficulties. In 1949 for the first time Dr. Nelson failed to persuade the Federal Judges. As a result one defendant obtained an injunction against the Food and Drug Administration restraining them from any further interference in his business! HONEST EVIDENCE SUPPRESSED . . . Up to that point it had been almost routine for defendants to be found guilty of violating " the law " and many were fined to the limit for mentioning in their advertising that nutritional deficiency could result in any kind of disease whatsoever! In one instance the Federal Trade Commission issued orders preventing health food exponents and lecturers from intimating that aluminium compounds in food could be harmful. In this case it appeared that the makers of an alumcontaining baking powder and the makers of aluminium cooking utensils had been pulling strings. In America the Federal Trade Commission enjoys completely arbitrary and despotic powers. Its orders require the same absolute obedience as those of any totalitarian despot. In the baking powder dispute above, the testimony of the defendant and his expert pathologists was so damning in relation to alum in foodstuffs that it has been suppressed. Those who had already obtained copies of the proceedings were warned by the Commission not to publish them under penalty of jail sentences. The suppressed document is Docket 540, The Avrill Report on Aluminium as a Cause of Cancer. . . . AND HONEST ADVERTISING DISCOURAGED The Federal Commission has issued orders to the makers of natural foodstuffs, warning them against any claim that natural food factors are in any way superior to synthetic imitations. For violation of the order the penalty is " a ten thousand dollar fine for each and every violation." Dr. Lee believes that this may explain why, in America, so little is heard from makers of better food products in their sales arguments of

just what is wrong with white flour, oleomargarine and pasteurised milk. Dr. Lee himself explains " The bleach used to keep bugs out of flour destroys both vitamin E and the enzyme, phosphatase. Pasteurisation destroys phosphatase. Butter contains vitamin E but oleomargarine does not. Oleo also contains Sodium Benzoate, a poison, because oleo does not keep without a chemical preservative."

ALUMINIUM POTS (Before going further it may be well to state here that alum in baking powder and aluminium in various other forms, e.g., as it arrives in the digestive tract from carelessly used cooking utensils, may be a most damaging material. That is quite different from the amounts of the metal eroded from carefully used aluminium pots and pans. Our own precise tests have shown that these are so minute as to have no measureable significance. Considerable emphasis, however, must be placed upon the words " carefully used " above.) To quote Dr. Lee again:— " Why do we need phosphatase? Simply because without it, we fail to split and assimilate the mineral salts in our foods that are in the form of Phytates. No enzyme is naturally secreted in the human intestinal tract that splits phytates, although many other animals, including the rat, do have such an enzyme. That is discussed in Hutchinson's Food and the Principles of Dietetics, tenth edition, where these authorities claim that no minerals can be assimilated from cereal foods, as a consequence. That is quite right, if we eat such cereal foods with pasteurised milk, and use cereals in which the enzyme content has been destroyed by bleaching chemicals. (For cereal germ and bran are the highest common sources of phosphatase, other than raw milk). The drastic effect of pasteurised milk in causing degenerative diseases in cats was emphatically demonstrated by Dr. Francis M. Pottenger, Jr., a few years ago, reported in the American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral Surgery, August 1946. The cats became afflicted with every disease common to man it seemed, gastric ulcers, constipation, arthritis, liver disease, heart disease, and even pyorrhea and mental aberrations. " Every doctor has wondered why his patients fail to assimilate calcium. He has not been informed that the reason is milk pasteurisation and flour bleaching."

SYMBIOTIC BACTERIA Here again it may be well to break in to explain the Nature Cure point of view. It is different not only from that of Hutchinson's authorities but also that of Dr. Royal Lee. While it is quite true that no enzyme appears to be secreted in the human intestinal tract for the purpose of splitting phytates, there is another route by which most of

the nutrients contained in the usually eaten cereals are made available to a normal, less " civilised," individual.* To-day the average townsman not only eats foods that have been doctored with drugs which weaken, nullify, or completely destroy the normal symbiotic bacteria of the human intestine, he is in the habit of taking aspirins to ease the resultant pains, and saccharine to act as a substitute for the lost flavours extracted from his processed foods, or use other of the many coal-tar derivatives for the purpose of lowering his awareness of his numerous miseries and physical incompetences. The total effect is that he exists at an exceedingly low level of health, and only by taking the most strenuous precautions is it possible for him to recover his normal vitality and re-establish his intestinal collaborators. The important thing is that it can be done. At this point I am in wholehearted agreement with Dr. Lee. The trouble is that the majority of our fellow-citizens remain utterly unaware of the juggling that goes on to ensure that no great proportion of the public shall ever learn how to reach a state of health wherein they can feel independent of the drug manufacturers and the food-faking combines. Here is Dr. Lee's warning:— DEMAND HONEST FOODS Do you see the vital importance of rigorously examining every article of food you use and of demanding the unprocessed, high quality you are entitled to? That is the only hope we have of escaping what Theodore Roosevelt called " Race Suicide." It is far later than we suspect in our progress toward the untimely end of all unblissfully ignorant mortals.

Perhaps the reader does not realise that all these harmful manipulations and fakings of foodstuffs are invariably carried out with Official Medical sanction. Here, the apparent tail wags the dog. Do not think that some honest local doctor can help you here. Throughout the average medical curriculum not a word of warning has been uttered to the medical student about the amount of foodfaking which surrounds him and his future patients. On that issue one must admit that few vegetarians, food reformers, or Nature Cure adherents are alert to all the dangers. Few have a full or wholly dependable knowledge of the facts.

* For a full statement of how this can be done see Soured Milk by C. Leslie Thomson.

KILLED BY (DOCTORED) WHOLEWHEAT BREAD How many of my readers are aware that in recent years there has been a 400 per cent, increase in the chemicals used to keep insects out of commercial " wholewheat " flour? The shocking possibilities have been demonstrated in a series of animal tests carried out in U.S.A. wherein 54 per cent, survived on white bread,* while on the commercial " wholewheat " bread tested there were no survivors! (Reported in News Letter of Academy of Applied Nutrition, March 1949.) Before going further it may be well to interpose a word of comfort here. As many Nature Cure adherents know, it is best to make your own wholewheat bread in the home. If a small hand-mill can be obtained to reduce the wheat berries to flour, also in the home, that is the ideal framework. If that is impractical or impossible, then advantage should be taken of the many sources now available for obtaining honest, wholewheat flour from composted grain, which can be bought at short intervals and in small quantities. That is an excellent second best. Addresses of suppliers and full particulars of several easy and interesting recipes and techniques will be found in Honest Bread and That Which Is Not, by Bertram T. Fraser, M.A., B.Sc, and C. Leslie Thomson, B.Sc. " BROWN BREAD " Also it may be well to mention in passing that brown bread, wheatmeal bread and wholewheat bread are by no means made to similar standards. White flour which is not up to standard is readily turned into brown flour by adding a few handfuls of bran, which may produce a similar appearance, but falls far short of replacing the vitally important vitamins, organised minerals and germ lost in the milling. So much for some of the practical difficulties encountered by the person who is keen to take precautions against ill-health. What about the patient who comes to us with all the indications of an already fully developed degenerative disease? A (PHYSICALLY) TYPICAL CASE Here let us look into a case, which in its physical aspects at least is fairly typical of what we have to handle. The outcome is in line with * When the white bread was "enriched" with synthetic vitamins, the survivals dropped to 49 per cent. The moral is: avoid all " enriched " and " fortified " foods.

what can be anticipated in any average case at a similar stage if practitioner and patient are genuinely co-operative, and provided the patient can remain calm and completely unpanicked. The patient under discussion, Mrs B., is a business woman, 43 years of age, and first came under our attention exactly two years ago as I write. She called to report progress just two weeks ago. This woman had experienced three increasingly severe nervous breakdowns at intervals from the age of 25 onward. When first seen (September 1950) her complexion was sallow, indeed more opaque and grey than any I had seen for a long time. Just a week previously she had been taken to see a specialist by her doctor. Their verdict was carcinoma of the right breast, and they insisted that her only hope lay in an early and complete excision of the breast. But just a few years earlier the woman's two older sisters had died in great pain after undergoing a similar operation. She related that fact to the surgeon, to explain why she herself had no intention of ever undergoing any such operation. THE ANGRY DOCTORS Forthwith both surgeon and doctor had become exceedingly angry. She was scolded and told that she was throwing away her only chance of survival. Despite their advice and her own increasing panic she refused to be convinced and told them she intended to try what Nature Cure could do, because a close friend had cleared up a similar growth by that technique. The following week she travelled to the Kingston Clinic, and when seen by me she was still greatly agitated from the scolding and exhibited a pronounced muscular tremor. This, she said, had recently become exaggerated because of family and business worries. In her own words:—" I have had lots of emotional upsets and now business is bad, but I bear no resentments." (An important piece of information. Tilden maintained that bitterness and sustained hatred could be a determining factor in both cause and cure of cancer). Despite the previous apparently careful examination by the doctor and consultant, not one breast but both breasts were found to be almost equally involved. On the right was a large nodulated tumour with retracted nipple, and on the left three smaller, but similar growths. In the right axilla there was a small secondary tumour and likewise in the left axilla, plus another on the left forearm. For some

unknown reason neither the doctor nor the specialist had mentioned or appeared to notice the other growths on the left side—only the larger tumour in the right breast had received their attention. For business reasons she was unable to undergo a long course of treatment, so her residential spell was restricted to three weeks. At the end of that time she went home with a routine for living and a set of rules to be adhered to firmly. It was also arranged that she should report to us immediately if anything of a worrying nature developed, and in any case after an interval of four weeks at most. Two months passed before she was seen again, and by that time, although considerable improvements in her general health had occurred, she was greatly worried. She had three anxieties: She had become much more aware of the growths, they were no smaller, and she had lost considerable weight in the meantime. She admitted, however, that the tumours were much softer, although more tender to the touch. " CRIMINAL FOLLY " During the interview the real cause of her greatly increased mental distress came out. After returning from Edinburgh, she had reported to her doctor who insisted that she must see the consultant surgeon again. Both doctor and consultant had urged upon her the need for an immediate operation, and the folly of continuing with the Nature Cure regime she was following. Not only so, but both practitioners had implied that it was criminal folly on our part to hold out any hope for her apart from surgery. Despite this considerably added strain she had been in a general way— apart from the mental distress—feeling better. On that note she was sent home in a more complacent state of mind. She had listened to, and understood, our explanation of the preliminary requirement in such cases as hers that any considerable clearing away of stale-tissue impurities must be accompanied by some loss of weight. The patient was not seen again until a further six months had elapsed. This time she was in good fighting trim and particularly pleased because her weight was now back to 8 st. 11 lbs., approximately where she had been before taking up Nature Cure treatment. In the meantime there had been no further contact with her

medical advisers. All tumours were markedly softer and gradually lessening in size. And the temporary tenderness had completely cleared up. Toward the end of the first year of Nature Cure treatment came a most severe crisis. Considerable discomfort was experienced from a series of boils which appeared on hands and wrists, and continued to appear and discharge for approximately one month. By the end of that time one finger had developed a good going whitlow. All of this uncomfortable flare-up was treated by telephoned advice, and after a total of five weeks of considerable misery things began to clear up satisfactorily without further complications. That crisis seems to have been the real turning point in her condition, and some 18 months from the beginning of her treatment she again reported. By that time all the tumours had gone down to such a small size that she was tremendously pleased with herself, and felt before reporting here that she should have the doctor check up again. As she expressed it, the urge was to add to the doctor's information, and for her own amusement. THE SILENT DOCTOR According to her story, this time, after a very thorough examination, during which the lady doctor was strangely silent, somewhat hesitantly she had suggested that it might be a good thing for her to see the specialist again. This was agreed to, and the specialist likewise spent a considerable time in examining her, but made no commentary whatsoever—very different from her previous experience. Some days later she saw the doctor again, this time by invitation. On that occasion she had been put through an even longer investigation; this time entirely vocal. She had been questioned about her food, the compresses, splashes, exercises, and other routines we had instructed her to carry out. As no remark had been passed about her condition, eventually she had asked: " But surely, Doctor, you must admit it is clearing up? " She was most amused and interested by the doctor's response. Without uttering a word that lady had walked over to a window and stood looking out for quite a long time. Then with a serious face she had turned and remarked: " Sometimes I think the surgeons want to

operate too much." According to the patient, that was the end of the interview, but it had been enough. In writing to tell me of this experience, these words occur: " On the way home I had to laugh when I thought of her anger 18 months ago when she was telling me how stupid I was, and asking me how dare I insult the surgeon by refusing to go through with the operation! " WHEN IMPROVEMENT BEGAN Her weight has now gone up to 9 st. 10 lbs. She is living a busy and constructive life as organising manager of a prosperous business. This phrase alone covers the rest of the story. " I have had not a single hour's illness in the past year—a wonderful record for me." On my advice, after getting home from this last visit she again went to see the doctor in order to allow that lady to check up for herself what had been achieved without surgical interference. These phrases from her letter, I imagine, should be of considerable interest to my questioners. " She (doctor) asked me to show her where the lump was, as she was unable to find it herself. After her examination the verdict was: tumour considerably reduced in size, no sign of malignancy whatsoever, general condition very good indeed, improvement in nervous condition excellent. She asked numerous questions as to how I could account for the improvement of the nerves, which have, as she is aware, been one of the greatest troubles of my life. My reply was that the improvement commenced when I started on N.C. and has been gathering momentum ever since. Her attitude towards N.C. is now one of mild tolerance, but as she herself said, ' There's no getting away from the fact that there is decided improvement generally.' I left her surgery feeling very well pleased with my visit."

Before going on with the rest of this essay it might be well to emphasise the difference between that kind of cure and " cure " as it occurs so commonly after surgical operations, or after prolonged applications of the medical drugs. A genuine cure means regeneration and this lady is no invalid now. She is completely fit. There has been no mere switching around of symptoms; she is well in every sense of the word. Not only has she cleared away the alleged cancer in the process, but, quite without special treatment, all the previous dis-tressing nervous jitters have completely disappeared and her vitality has been " gathering momentum " ever since she started Nature Cure. I shall be greatly disappointed if, in twenty years from now she is not a younger-looking and altogether fitter woman than she was when first seen by us. We too are well pleased with results to date.

From our angle the important facts are (1) that her initial degree of high toxicity was not of long standing, and (2) she proved to be a woman of great tenacity of purpose, (3) having made up her mind to do her own curing despite the doctor's scolding and surgeon's disapproval, she followed our instructions to the letter, (4) the further excellent point is that she is an exceptionally intelligent example of homo sapiens and I do not anticipate a reversion to former unwholesome habits which led to the original hypertoxicity. But how are we to reduce such human experiences to an honest table of cold-blooded statistics? Unfortunately that degree of steadfastness is rare even among N.C. adherents. Otherwise the case is fairly typical of some thousands of desperately distressed patients who have passed through our hands. HOW TO STAY SICK Before going on to discuss Mrs B's case in its relationship to Nature Cure philosophy and practice, I think I might take this opportunity to illustrate a peculiar attitude of mind which after a year or two tends to manifest itself among those who, after having been desperately ill for some time have come under Nature Cure to make an excellent recovery. This aspect was well brought out in a recent interview with a highly educated, intelligent couple who jointly manage an efficiently-run business. They are happily married, but astonishingly outspoken toward each other—at least in my presence. WHAT WENT WRONG? The lady opened the interview with approximately these words: " I am greatly disappointed. For about four years I have followed the Kingston advice to the letter. I made great progress in the first month, and for two years I was enthusiastic—bubbling over with good health. Then, for no reason that I can think of things began to go wrong, and for a year past I have been feeling more and more run down. It cannot be anything I have done because I have stuck to your instructions without deviation throughout the four years. What I want to know is what can have gone wrong? How can I get back to where I was two years ago? "

NOT FOR THE RECORD At this point, without warning, her husband suddenly broke into her monologue with these devastating words: " Don't talk nonsense! You stuck to it for two years, then you began to eat anything and everything that came along." (Turning to me) " Mr Thomson, it is only since she wrote to you three weeks ago for an appointment that she stopped drinking ten cups of tea a day. Now she's made herself believe, and is trying to convince you, that that's the way she's been living all the time! " Seldom have we such a complete and verified picture of how some people allow themselves to cheat just a little, not realising that even if they succeed in fooling us, that does not absolve them in the slightest degree. The account has to be settled within their own bodily economy, to gain the approval of " that great intelligence, that plurality with one mind " which constitutes their bodies. When " that body with its great intelligence " disapproves, then disrupted health becomes inevitable. Item One:—I have not the slightest doubt that both the doctor and the surgeon involved in this case would refuse to admit, or even deny, their diagnosis of the malignancy of the condition that has faded away under Nature Cure guidance. In hundreds of cases—and I mean hundreds—that has been the unblushing response when efforts have been made by patients to obtain confirmation of the successes they have won by Nature Cure techniques. That has happened after the Highest Authorities in the land have made not only the most positive diagnosis, but quite terrifying statements of what would happen—no hope whatever if no operation forthwith, to say nothing of unspeakable horrors that would be experienced before death. Now, quite inexplicably, their X-ray plates have been mislaid and all their written records are missing. Most unfortunate! Item Two:—In view of our teaching that (1) there is but one physical disease: tissue uncleanliness; (2) that every acute disease is a healing and cleansing effort on the part of the bodily forces; (3) that when the acute stage of a disease is suppressed in one part of the body and in one form, it is liable after a period of quiescence to reappear, either at the same point, or elsewhere in the body. This mostly happens in a slightly different form: e.g., a cold may become

a sinusitis or a laryngitis. Suppressed in turn these become otitis media or tuberculosis, rheumatism, rheumatoid arthritis, etc., etc.; (4) when that chronic stage has been reached, the usual bodily response to the discontinuance of suppressive treatment and any reasonable return to wholesome living habits is a retracing of the steps back over the acute phases. These crises continue until each part in turn has completed its cleansing work. Then after further periods of rest still other " healing crises " occur in other parts of the body, until every dusty and cobwebbed corner has been swept in these repeated but essential house-cleanings; (5) to any uninitiated onlooker each of these bodily house-cleanings is a new disease, and without some training in the Nature Cure outlook, they become alarmed because, to them, the whole situation just does not make sense. It is absolutely true that what the Nature Cure adherent greets with real joy is viewed with equally genuine alarm (not the notorious professional form sometimes heard)* by any perfectly sincere medical practitioner—and just as much so by any uninformed member of the lay public; (6) the rule is that the regenerating patient feels a real sense of improving bodily and mental condition after each " crisis." As the sage counsels: There is more intelligence in thy body than in thy best wisdom. And who, then, can say to what end thy body hath need of thy best wisdom? " I " thou sayest, and are proud of that word. But a greater matter—which thou wilt not believe—is thy body and its great intelligence. It saith not I, but it doth I . . . It ruleth, even over the I.

All of that outlook must be grasped by the patient if the final result is to be a sound and permanently satisfactory job. There is no escape from that requirement. The Nature Cure patient must build up and apply his own fairly clean-cut understanding. Not only the practitioner, much more so the patient must be philosophic and take a long view if he is to attain a full and lasting cure. For the long-established chronic patient we have no sudden or dramatic offerings. In the majority of cases the early relief is real and encouragingly progressive; but in malignant conditions, even where the best possible degree of recovery has been achieved, the Nature * Nurse to worried patient: " There, there! Don't let his diagnosis upset you. Doctors are like politicians; they view with alarm so that they can later point with pride!

Cure way of life must be accepted as a permanency. It should not be seen as a mere episode of a few weeks, months, or even years. Perhaps that explains the inner meaning of the old Nature Cure saw: " There are no incurable diseases; there are many incurable patients." ORTHODOX ADMISSIONS We of the Nature Cure School are by no means alone in the belief that there is no clean-cut line of demarcation between the manynamed separate diseases, " disease entities," " symptom complexes " and " disease syndromes." In almost every case there are at least a dozen different names available for application to any disease condition. To add to the complication there are hordes of specialists and consultants, each ready and eager to prove that practically any condition involves his particular pet area, and that his opinion accordingly is the vital and definitive one. In these circumstances we have to give the highest possible marks for the courage and intellectual integrity of men who, after having achieved high honour among their contemporaries have felt driven to admit the emptiness of their former triumphs. " SUCCESSFUL CURES " Consider these illustrative statements: " Several years ago Samuel D. Gross, the outstanding authority of Philadelphia and America, gave a series of lectures in a Philadelphia medical college to medical students and practitioners on cancer, bringing up many cases which had got well under his treatment, surgical or otherwise. When the classes closed at the end of the series he said to his audience: " I have been telling you about many successful cures made on cancerous subjects. The truth of the matter is, as my fuller experience since gained has taught me, that all those cured cases were not cancer. My best judgement is that all real cancer cases I treated died."

Commenting upon the foregoing, Dr. Tilden writes:— Certainly the discerning should admire the noble spirit of this sweeping confession. Why is the truth and nothing but the truth, of every doctor's experience with cancer, not given as Dr. Gross expressed his? Because few have had the Ripe Experience of Dr. Gross. . . I cannot remember ever having seen a case recover in which the disease had not returned after the patient had been operated upon. It is easy to tell why: nothing is done to correct the constitutional derangement which made the

disease possible. Thousands of breasts are removed every year all over the country, and a large percentage " get well," the cure lasting from one to two years. In a few cases the cancer never returns. Why? Because there was no cancer.

OBDURATE FACTS Admirable sincerity and honesty of purpose, but not of a nature to satisfy statistical requirements of my questioners! How is it possible to make an accurate estimate on the basis revealed in the foregoing? Against these opinions we have the assurance of thousands of cancer specialists of the triumphs they score day-after-day with the accepted procedures. Unfortunately for their case the vital statistics of the nation point in a diametrically opposite direction. The more they operate and irradiate, or otherwise interfere, the higher goes the death rate. " KINGSTON: MY COURT OF FINAL APPEAL " The above description was used by a patient who had spent a small fortune in travelling about, desperately seeking for some relief, until he found Kingston. In a sense the words explain the small statistical base mentioned by the second questioner. Our best results are obtained among people who have not been damaged by radium, surgery, etc., and who are, and remain, unpanicked, enthusiastic and co-operative. REVISED DIAGNOSIS As we saw in numerous places earlier in this book, no matter how complete and final the orthodox diagnoses of cancer may have been, always the Eminent Consultants hasten to reverse their findings the moment recovery has been achieved by Nature Cure procedures. Not that a satisfactory outcome can always be achieved, but when it is, its value for orthodox statistical purposes vanishes. There had been no cancer—only a regrettable mistake in their own diagnosis! That anti-climax, reached and repeated with remarkable frequency, should give the honest men in the drug profession much food for thought. In particular consider the cases wherein their own leaders have examined and given the most clean-cut and specific diagnoses of malignancy, very often after taking samples and making analysis of discharges, etc. Whenever any such patient gets well

under Nature Cure their own diagnosis is forthwith rejected, and freely they admit that, In that particular case, they were wrong. On the face of it we cannot accept uncritically their own similar diagnoses in cases wherein they claim triumphs, but where we have no checks whatever because they alone made the diagnosis and gave the treatment. A CROSS SECTION Our beliefs in these matters are founded upon the solid facts arising out of many thousands of clinical results. Before we saw them a high proportion of our patients had been under treatment from several doctors, leading consultants or recognised specialists before either the patients or their relatives were told that there was no possibility of cure. Even more commonly they were informed that their only hope lay in some drastic operation. Often great pressure had been put upon them to undergo that recommended procedure immediately. As to results under Nature Cure, let me quote the following excerpt from what John Pearmain describes as: A chronological account of highlights of a seven-months' trip by train and bicycle in England, Eire, North Ireland, Scotland, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Switzerland, Italy and France to study organic farming in relation to human health.

It appears in a " special enlarged " issue of Normal Agriculture for August, 1952. Published at Starland Farm, R.D.I., Basking Ridge, N.J., U.S.A. It should be as it is the quite uncensored report of a personal investigation. Here are the parts relating to Kingston: AN AMERICAN VISITS KINGSTON " September 27, and, previously, half a day on the 22nd, at the Kingston Clinic Gilmerton Road, Edinburgh, 9 (Telephone Liberton 79435)—Kingston Clinic started some 14 years ago by Mr J. C. Thomson. Talked each of the several times I was at the Clinic with patients and former patients, some of whom had cancer, angina pectoris, acute asthma, heart disease and other afflictions, Mr Thomson stating that " We do it cure any one. We give them the right diet* and they cure themselves." * Mr Pearmain is quoting from memory. Naturally as he is particularly interested in composting, wholesome crops and balanced feeding, he noticed the food aspect of our work, rather than what I would consider the many other at least equally important features. I imagine that my statement would run more as follows: " We try to put them on the right road, and give them all necessary instructions so that they can cure themselves."

" Food at the Clinic is estimated to be 80 per cent, compostgrown. Some raised in their own gardens adjoining the Clinic and the rest obtained from organic farms in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh, or through a local wholesaler who has other sources of supply for this type of produce. THE " BELFAST LECTURE " " Meals at the Clinic are vegetarian, though Mr Thomson in his excellent Belfast Lecture (a limited number of copies of it available) indicates that a moderate amount of meat in a diet is not considered harmful. Boiled and baked potatoes in their jackets are served, other cooked vegetables, whole (compost-grown) meal bread, fruits, salads, vegetable and fruit juices, desserts, all excellently and attractively served. " September 28 —Twenty miles by bus to North Berwick and over the farm of James B. Miller, Easter Ferrygate, whose compostgrown vegetables, many of them sold in the Edinburgh market and, some of them, to the Kingston Clinic. " In the evening attended a small meeting at the home of Mr E. M. Johnston, a former attorney, who had sold his law practice to become a student at the Kingston Clinic with the idea of, some day, running a clinic of his own. Present at this informal meeting was a well-known Edinburgh doctor, also interested in the possibilities of compostgrown diet. " September 29.—To the farm of William A. Stephen, Keavil Farm, Crossford, Dunfermline—dairy cattle and mixed crops, excellent compost system and general farm practice. Some of his vegetables sold to the Kingston Clinic. PATIENTS INTERVIEWED " September 30.—All day at the Clinic. Interviewed several patients: A Mr M. who had returned to the Clinic for a check-up and to see his friends, told me that fourteen years ago he had had twentyone radium needles in his face and neck, and a radium collar, for a cancer covering the right side of his face, his lower jaw and neck. He said that an inch-and-a-half section of his jaw had dropped out, that the radium had burned a hole in his cheek which had to be covered with a pad when he talked so that the saliva from his mouth would not run down his cheek. He said that the cancer had been completely

cured by the diet at the Kingston Clinic and that later doctors skingrafted his face which, when I saw it, was one large scar covering the entire area of the right side of his face and neck. He said that he was now in perfect health, and walked four or five miles daily back and forth to his business. He is eighty-one years old and since being at the Clinic has continued to live on compost-grown food. Colour photographs of Mr M. taken by me show clearly the damage done by this disease and subsequent radium treatment, also the marvellous way that his face healed. " Mrs X. of London told me that she had been at the Kingston Clinic for six weeks, that she had had agina pectoris two or three spasms a day, and had been in agony and terror of the future, that the orthodox medical treatment given her before she came to the Clinic seemed to be providing no improvement. She stated that the first week at the Clinic she had only two or three spasms and none thereafter, and that she felt that she was headed for complete recovery. CRIPPLED BY ASTHMA " Miss A. of Edinburgh, also told me that she had had acute asthma, that she had been crippled with it; that her doctor had put her to bed for several months and had told her that she had to give up her business and not even think of it, that worry over her business would affect her heart. After three months in bed she had been allowed to get up for five minutes a day. She had a companion who had been at the Kingston Clinic and finally took her advice and came to the Clinic herself. The diet had cured her completely. She had returned to her business and was conducting it as usual when I talked with her. She said she was completely well. SIX MONTHS IN BED " Two other patients told me of a fourteen-year-old boy who had been brought to the Clinic some ten weeks previously and who had left two days before my arrival. He had had a heart condition and had been in bed six months, greatly overweight, not allowed to walk up or down stairs, and his parents had been told that he would be in bed until he was twenty-one years old. Before he left, he had been racing another boy on a bicycle, running and jumping, playing normally the way any boy of his age should, his weight greatly reduced. He was returning to school, the only limitations on what he could do being that he must eat compost-grown food in future.*

" Mr Thomson stated that a number of years ago, the charge had been made that the Kingston Clinic was running a nursing home without a licence. The police from Edinburgh had been sent out to investigate. They had interviewed the staff, the patients at the Clinic, and former patients living in the neighbourhood. The Clinic won the case when it came to court and the charge was dismissed, Mr Thomson stating that the most interesting development was later—that the police in Edinburgh were so impressed by the evidence they dug up in their investigations that, since then, they had been sending friends to the Clinic for treatment." —John Pearmain (Normal Agriculture, August 1952)

DISTRESSED SPECIALISTS So our ideas do filter across. Through books and magazines, and at Personal Health Association and other lectures, we give enough information to provide an honest lead for any who may be interested. Some medicals come to these meetings regularly, and quite a few others, in all parts of the world, are subscribers to Rude Health. Much more disturbingly, undeniable proofs of our results have been laid at the doors of large numbers of specialists in their own home towns. Suddenly they have been confronted, either in the street or at some social gathering, with one of their discarded cancer patients, long ago written off as dead. Especially distressing, it must have been, to find them in vigorous and (as the complaining lady described it earlier) " bubbling over " health. A large number of these specialists have asked for, and been given —or the patient has insisted upon giving!—a fairly detailed description of how it was done. From just that kind of contact a real interest has been aroused in certain practitioners. In a general way, however, that type of proof does not alter the attitude of the specialists, although probably they, as individuals, have stumbled upon these formerly " incurable " patients more frequently than do G.Ps. Any of these cases noticed in the literature of specialists is generally expressed in some such phrase as: "This patient made a remarkable spontaneous recovery some eighteen months after all treatment had been discontinued." If it were not that their professional training had blinded them to the implications, the fact that such an " impossibility " had occurred simply through discontinuing treatment might lead them straight to a solution of their cancer problems.

As I see it, there is bound to be a cumulative effect upon the G.Ps. in the villages and smaller towns—they cannot evade these former patients, day after day and year after year. In the end that is bound to bring about a wholesome modification in medical outlook—say within the next few hundred years. Accordingly I remain hopeful. WHEN THE PATIENT STOPS TRYING You state that tumours which have been under control for long periods of time may suddenly flare up again to become actively malignant if the patient becomes either bitterly resentful or really alarmed. Are there any statistical proofs of that effect?—E. L. P., Perth, Australia. As explained earlier, it is impossible to reduce many interesting aspects of health and disease to a table of statistics which would have any real meaning. My belief is that many a highly-strung patient, whose condition was not necessarily critical, has died soon after a medical adviser has given an unspoken verdict by a glum look, or by what the anxious patient interprets as a despairing shake of the head. Such results are not placed on any statistical tables. One rather dramatic case may point the moral. He was a tall, slim young man of 35 who presented himself at Kingston Clinic early in the war, having been compulsorily retired on pension from an overseas government post. The documents he produced stated that he had carcinoma of the large intestine, and a relative who accompanied him informed me that his life-expectation had been placed at only a few months by an independent London specialist who had examined him after his return home. Surgical investigation had disclosed the condition to be inoperable. FROM RECOVERY . . . When first seen by me he was in a pitifully enervated and emaciated condition, able to walk only a few yards. Under treatment, in the course of two months he was taking quite long walks daily, and thoroughly enjoying life. The tumour steadily reduced in size, and after about four months was just perceptible on palpation and causing him no discomfort whatever. At that stage he went to live in the country, and eventually moved to the north of Scotland and took up forestry. For the better part of a year this work continued, and then, on my advice, he went to London and presented himself to the

government department involved. There he asked to be reinstated because his health was now completely restored and he was living an active, indeed an athletic life without undue tiredness or discomfort. His first request met with stony refusal, but an approach made through a highly-placed relative resulted in a call for medical investigation. After several visits to the official consultant and many X-ray and other examinations, he was informed that he had been reinstated and that he must hold himself prepared to sail from a British port (unnamed, as this was war-time) in approximately two months time. His first move thereafter—his own idea—was to return to Kingston to undergo four weeks of complete tuning-up and overhaul. As related to the invalid we had treated a year earlier, his condition by that time had become almost unrecognisable. He had become happy and smiling, well set up, with a good chest, excellent blood pressure, stamina, etc. . . . TO BREAKDOWN Unfortunately that happy situation was not maintained. A few days after arrival he came to me in an agitated state and with an exceedingly white face. Pointing to a newspaper report about some one who had undergone treatment " for carcinoma, a form of cancer," his words were: " It says here that carcinoma means cancer. I had no idea my condition was so serious." To this I responded that as he had now recovered—not only had he our word for that, but the testimony of the government-sponsored specialists he had seen in London—surely he should forget the past to foster and improve upon the good health already built up. Unfortunately he proved inconsolable. To our arguments he replied: ' If I had known it was cancer I would not have tried. I know from what has happened to my relatives that cancer is incurable." He even asked, " Why didn't you tell me that carcinoma was cancer? It would have saved all this effort for nothing." To cut a long story short, that same afternoon he went to bed, turned his face to the wall and from that point onward refused to speak to anybody Rapidly his condition deteriorated; his pulse could scarcely be felt and 10 days later he died without making the slightest effort on his own behalf. Only to the Western mind does such an effect seem extraordinary. Eastern peoples, who are more alert to the good and evil effects of

constructive or destructive thoughts, would look upon such a result as a commonplace. For many of them the wonder would be that he lasted ten days after such an apparently complete acceptance of defeat. SMOKING: A PROBLEM INVOLVING SHOPOCRACY I feel that you are a little unfair to those who do not see eye to eye with you about disease causation and cure. I have met many of the leading figures of British and American merchandising circles, and I cannot imagine one of them making difficulties for anyone who could help in clearing up cancer problems, even if it meant a loss of profits to themselves. —J. L. B., Leeds. I agree that if the issue were put to one of our merchant princes on a television programme and in clean-cut terms, the spoken answer would be as anticipated by my critic. It is still true, however, that actions speak louder than words. In the current issue of The Lancet as I write (17: 10: 52) there appears a communication from a somewhat disturbed practitioner, Dr. Horace Joules, Medical Director of the Central Middlesex Hospital. He claims that the risks of smoking " are being purposely kept from the public." After stating that he was addicted to 35 cigarettes a day for 30 years, he goes on:— VESTED INTERESTS The chief risk is cancer of the lung. In this country in 1951 more people died of this condition than from tuberculosis. A close association has been proved beyond any doubt. If such a close association had been shown between rapidly increasing cancer and any other social phenomenon publicity would have been nation-wide. Many powerful bodies have a vested interest in playing down such publicity. The Treasury is foremost in this respect because it receives £610 million yearly from the tobacco tax. The national press is interested in revenue from advertisements, and the cinemas are also recipients of advertising revenue from the tobacco companies. A reasoned statement about the ill-effects of tobacco is rarely given to the public. In my own medical wards I have never less than three or four cases of this condition at any one time. This situation is becoming so serious that we cannot allow it to continue without emphatic protest.

I would ask my critic to consider the ethical standards of the individuals who purposely keep these vital facts from the public.

Similarily with the many powerful bodies whom Dr. Joules notices as " playing down " the publicity which might save innumerable people from agonising and untimely deaths. Our Government and the Treasury cannot very well take a part in exposing the terrible implications behind this trade. So long as they accept £610 million per annum from the tobacconists our Government must be " on their side "—no matter what happens to John Citizen.* It took a high degree of intestinal fortitude for Dr. Joules to voice that honest finding. As he must be well aware, soon a subtle but intensive " smear " campaign will open up against him. The next move will probably come from some ambitious practitioner in another hospital. He will step forth to defend smoking: he will have found that it is especially valuable for soothing down lung cancers, and never has tobacco been a causal factor. According to precedent, for him will follow many professional and material gains: e.g., offers of lectureships, professorships, company directorships, etc. In a letter to the Scotsman (21: 1:53) an M.A., B.Sc, Ph.D., gives a list of 9 questions which must be answered (all of them already fully investigated and answered), and finishes with these words:— There have, after all, been various " crazes " in the medical profession in the past, and one would like to be sure that this is not one such. In reality no previous medical crazes have revolved around non-profit-making discoveries. Always they have been well organised from the outside by various commercial interests, which were making a good thing out of them: the doctors merely acting as stooges, carrying out the desires of clever merchant princes.

HOLLOW LAUGHTER AND 5% A considerable degree of intensity has grown up on the part of these nicotinophile doctors in their efforts to save something from the wreckage. One Authority even goes so far as to suggest that perhaps it is not smoking which is causing lung cancer: rather it may be that the types of people who are inclined toward lung cancer are likewise those who, because of mental and emotional imbalance are liable to smoke heavily. That comes perilously close to an acceptance of the " wholeness " philosophy of Nature Cure. Even such a departure from strict orthodoxy would appear to be less odious than the abandonment of Lady Nicotine. * And a great deal does happen. Interested readers are referred to the present author's brochure Smoking: the Case Against Tobacco.

Here is an illustration of how a kindly cigarette-smoking professor attempts to protect his addict listeners from worry about vital but unpleasant facts. From the Edinburgh press of February 13th: SMOKING " A RISK WORTH TAKING " The fear of death was not a good reason for stopping smoking, in the opinion of Professor F. A. E. Crew, of the chair of Public Health and Social Medicine at Edinburgh University. . . ." Give it up by all means, if you can't afford it," he added, amid laughter. Professor Crew (who is himself a cigarette smoker) . . . remarked that he had been just on the point of asking the chairman if he might smoke, and said that there was no doubt, according to the evidence available, that it was highly likely that considerable cigarette smoking added to the danger of cancer of the lung. " But if this pleasure is taken away from a man, what is he given in return? I was taught in youth to smoke because of the tensions of life and to enable me to escape into fantasy. If we have become a nation of addicts, there is a reason behind it." " Personally," he continued, " I find that the work I do is advantaged by my addiction. I know a number of people who have given up smoking because of this statement about cancer, and they say they are much better. Better for what? In any case cigarette smoking is by no means the only factor in causation of bronchial carcinoma. If it adds five per cent, to the risk, and you enjoy smoking, I think the risk is worth taking."

(Personally I cannot think of anything more urgent for any thinking man or woman than the avoidance of unnecessary physical discomfort, invalidism and premature death.). Here is how C. Leslie Thomson looks upon that " five per cent." (Rude Health, May 1953). He is in process of discussing an excellent article which appeared in The Picture Post: " The Bread Racket," by Fyfe Robertson. He continues:— " Picture Post's audacity was not approved by every one, of course, and several other periodicals and papers saw it as their duty to try to counteract the ' damage,' by tastefully draping little bits of grubby gauze over poor, naked Truth. Just as the television report on the relationship between smoking and lung-cancer caused

an outbreak of little articles on the harmlessness of smoking, so, by strange coincidence, small news items on the advantages of white bread began sprouting through the pages of the big-circulation newspapers. One cannot question the honest intention of the journalists who write these ' apologies,' but equally one cannot help feeling that it must be a comfort to the advertising manager of a newspaper to find that its editorial staff can substantiate the claims and approve the products of his best customers. THE BEST PEOPLE DO IT " Thus the science reporter of one large-circulation daily took it upon himself to upbraid, for spreading alarm and despondency, the doctors who had provided material for the TV programme. The connection between smoking and lung cancer, he assured his readers, was no more that a superficial appearance. There were no proofs that any firm link existed. Indeed, if any one were foolish enough to take the TV item seriously, their fears could be completely dispelled by noting that certain specialists in lung cancer actually smoked while lecturing to their students. " Another university professor was widely and fully reported when he told a meeting that he considered the risk of cancer well worth taking. According to his estimate, smoking increased the chance of cancer developing in any particular individual by only 5 per cent. One wonders whether this cheerful nicotinophile had ever observed the agonies of a human being suffering from lung cancer. Possibly his professional vivisectional activities have so dulled his perceptions of distress in others that he can contemplate with calmness a tragedy which he expresses in an impersonal percentage. (Which, like those in political propaganda, seems intended to conceal more than to clarify). The very least that ' only five per cent.' can mean is that one person in every twenty with the condition could have avoided it by making no other change in his way of living than giving up smoking. (And if that is so, it obviously means that a much higher proportion could have saved themselves by avoiding other carcinogenic factors.) Also, the reputed five per cent, refers only to diagnosed lung cancers, and does not include all the other respiratory distresses and diseases caused or contributed to by smoking; nor the cardiac, digestive or general systemic disorders of a less horrifying nature.

NO SMOKE WITHOUT TAR " A doctor, writing at the same time in an evening paper in the city where that professor occupies his chair, gave figures which are hard to reconcile with ' five per cent.' Quoting the findings of Dr. Doll and Professor Bradford, he said:— ' After the age of 45 the danger of developing cancer of the lung is 50 times as much in those who smoke 25 cigarettes a day as it is in non-smokers.' Somehow one is reminded of the shopkeeper who, interviewing prospective assistants, asked:— ' If I buy an article for sixpence, and sell it for half-a-crown, what is my profit? ' The boy who replied ' five per cent.' got the job. But even that bright youth had not stretched ' five per cent.' so far as to cover a ' 50 times ' increase. " The doctor-journalist went on to explain reassuringly that ' no more carcinogens are found in pure tobacco than in any other green vegetable.' That may be perfectly true, but the implication is fundamentally dishonest. It is not the cancer-generating property of green tobacco leaves we are concerned about, but the cancergenerating properties in tobacco smoke; a very different matter. His resounding closing paragraph reads:— ' I tell you there is a greater amount of carcinogenous material drawn into our lungs during one day of a city fog than there is in a whole year's supply of cigarettes for a heavy smoker.'

" Very encouraging. And totally misleading. Of course, the medico may simply not know that incomplete combustion—as in a cigarette—produces a variety of poisons, some of them tarry. He does know that tar is carcinogenous, because he mentions it in his article. But some one ought to tell him that what is produced by the application of intense heat to pure vegetable matter, in conditions of restricted oxygen supply, is tar. " But then, when ignorance pays the bills, 'twere folly to be wise." And finally, from the News Chronicle (19:2:53):— IS SMOKING HARMFUL? NO PROOF, SAYS TOBACCO BOSS Available evidence is far from conclusive and by no means constitutes proof, declares Sir Robert John Sinclair, Chairman of the Imperial Tobacco Company. . . . But, he adds, "If it should ever be proved that there exists something harmful in tobacco, even in the minutest quantities, which could conceivably make smoking one of the causes of this disease, we should, I hope, be the first to

take steps to eliminate it. . . ."

Who said that? Well! well! THE COST OF CANCER " RESEARCH " Is it not true that great advances have been made in the treatment of cancer over the past fifty years, and that the cost has been slight as against the gratifying saving of life?—J. S., Kilmarnock. No, it is not true. I do not see any advance at all, and I do not believe that a single life has been saved. The death-rate from cancer rises steadily year by year in step with the increasing use of drugs, unnecessary surgery, radium, deep X-ray therapy and the now almost universal faking and medicating of foodstuffs. If there had been even the slightest saving of life the death-rate should be falling. The tables (in Chapter I) speak for themselves. At the same time the question covers a belief firmly held by many people, probably because of expensive " educational " efforts for propagating downright falsehoods about the cure of cancer. Unfortunately, to aid the publicity many highly-placed individuals have allowed their names to appear as patrons. Not that they are altogether to blame—in a sense they are just as much the victims of this cunning propaganda as is the layman who subscribes to this socalled noble work. Likewise with many medical doctors not directly involved in cancer financial agreements. They too are fooled by the steady stream of irresponsible literature issued to the public. " A WICKED CLAIM " Some time ago in The Times the British Empire Cancer Campaign sponsored an announcement entitled The Attack and Defeat of Cancer, in which this sentence occurs:— Following the very recent discovery of the complete control of cancer by this Campaign on one site of the body, intense investigations are now proceeding to completely control cancer in all sites of the body.

Commenting on that astounding statement, M. Beddow Bayly, M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P., calls it " a wicked and misleading claim," and goes on: " one can only conclude, issued with the object of collecting funds. It is quite untrue and its exaggerated wording was severely criticised in The Medical World."

Dr. Beddow Bayly tells how the discovery of what he calls " the temporary benefit " of stilboestrol owes nothing to the work of the B.E.C.C. It came wholly from surgeons in the U.S.A. He proves what he bluntly calls " the falsity of the claim," with ample data. Apart from the great sums of money contributed by the public for " fighting cancer " there have been large and increasing grants from the Exchequer. So these expensive and empty forms of research " have the Government on their side " despite repeated protests and exposures. This is how James Burnet, M.A., M.D., F.R.C.P.E., LL.B., dismisses the allegedly scientific aspects of research into cancer:— I submit that it will never be solved so long as the present methods are persisted in . . . such experiments doubtless keep research workers busy, giving them something to do; but the whole business, in my opinion, is an absolute waste of time, energy and money.

Many leading medical authorities and periodicals deplore the thinly disguised publicity for cancer specialists which appears in the name of " cancer research." Here is what J. E. R. M'Donagh, F.R.C.S., has to say in The Nature of Disease, Vol. I., p. 2:— Over four million pounds have been wasted upon cancer research when the nature of the condition should at all times have been obvious and its prevention solely a matter of proper living.

That would be an excellent Nature Cure note on which to finish, but just one final snappy question from The Medical Journal:— The Imperial Research Fund has a high sounding name certainly, but what has it done to reduce the mortality from cancer in this country?

That question was asked in July 1936 and the reply is still awaited. If my critic knows the answer, I assure him it would be welcomed by honest medical practitioners as much as by ourselves. TUBERCULOSIS, ARTHRITIS AND HEART DISEASE You make passing references to tuberculosis, arthritis and heart disease. Are these, too, amenable to natural healing?—V.E., Los Angeles. In any condition of ill health, much depends upon the degree of damage already sustained by vital organs. Even more important is the intensity of effort the patient is prepared to put forth on his or her own behalf. In my opinion, all cures are self-cures.

In a general way we are powerless to help the invalid whose first proviso runs like this: " I'll be glad to do anything—anything at all—so long as I'm not asked to . . ." The desperately ill patient must be prepared to stop forthwith all the habits that caused his breakdown. Likewise he has to deal firmly with the gaps he has permitted to develop in his cerebrations and in his ways of life. Provided he can maintain an honest and wholeheartedly sustained effort in that direction almost anything becomes possible. Here are a selection of letters from past patients which speak for themselves. The first comes from Yorkshire. TUBERCULOSIS (BOVINE-SPINAL) THE YEARS THE LOCUSTS HAVE EATEN, By THE MAN WHO CAME BACK FROM HELL.

As one who has benefited from N.C. I should like to tell my experiences in the hope that others may be led to benefit similarly. My trouble started in 1943 when a swelling formed on my neck. I consulted the local Dr. who thought it was a T.B. gland and advised its removal (" a minor operation which will keep you from your business for ten days or a fortnight "). I had the operation performed by one of our best surgeons but although the wound was dressed and elastoplasted every other day for a year, it still did not heal. Then my back became painful. This was diagnosed as lumbago and I was treated for this new complaint for 20 weeks after which I told my doctor I was not satisfied, so he arranged for me to consult " the best specialist in the North " (his words). The specialist examined me and said I had better have an X-ray to make sure that my spine was all right. A week later the glad tidings came through that my spine was o.k. and a little massage and infra-red ray treatment would put me right in quick time. But despite prolonged massage, infra-red, etc., I gradually got worse until about a year later I was carried on a stretcher into our local hospital. Then came another consultation between the Heads, and the alarming news that the X-rays had lied; something very serious was wrong. In fact, I was suffering from either a cancer or a T.B. spine. Later tuberculosis of the spine was confirmed. I was next placed on a Bradford frame and told if I remained perfectly still I should be better in a year. I had a further X-ray 3 months later and then one every six months until the final heart-breaking words: " We are sorry, but we cannot do anything for you; you are too old for the bones in your spine to harden." At the same time they told my family that it was only a matter of a few months, and that I would never get off the frame again.

Then set in a period of hopelessness and despair; just praying for the end. I tried to reconcile myself to this hopeless position. I gave my more intimate belongings to friends and arranged for my remains to be cremated. That was my condition when a business acquaintance suggested I should try Nature Cure. I had never heard of it but in the true drowning man tradition I clutched at this (as I thought) straw. The outcome was that Mr Thomson, of the Kingston Clinic, Edinburgh, came to see me. I shall never forget his words " I cannot cure you, but you can probably cure yourself if you will do as I tell you." From that interview hope was reborn and right away I began to improve. A complete change of diet put an end to my indigestion which had grown to be a nightmare under the medical routine. The gentle exercises started the blood circulating through my almost useless limbs and, best of all, those fits of black despair and hopelessness gave way to a happier and more hopeful outlook. In six months time, still on my Bradford frame, I was able to journey to Kingston by ambulance. To cut a long story short, two months later I returned home, by train, sitting up like a human being. Since then, I have steadily grown stronger until I can put in a good day's walking about attending to my farm and going to meetings and seeing the things I thought I should never see again. To illustrate the advance made, three weeks ago, after a fortnight's holiday at Kingston, I travelled, as an ordinary passenger, on a tour to Oban and back in one day. The following day I returned home by train, over 200 miles, walked round a 400 acre farm and then went to the pictures and got up next morning feeling fitter than I had done for 20 years. Yesterday I met a Dr. friend who greeted me thus: " Well, I never expected to see you about again. I thought you would have joined the angels some years ago. But you always were a contrary cuss and made a habit of finding the Bluebird. But be careful! Old Man Fate may be waiting round the corner with a sandbag!" My reply was: " If you chaps had carried on as you were doing it is certain I would not have been here now. Whatever Old Man Fate may have in store, I have had 18 months of useful enjoyable life, that according to your own experts I should not have had. I am contrary enough to believe I have as many years left as you have, although you are a younger man." I don't think I am biased against the medical profession, but I judge from four years of the best available medical and surgical care, followed by two years N.C. experience, and I am telling the events as they occurred and stating the facts as I found them. After discussing the profession with other hospital patients, I should group Drs., Nurses, Sisters, etc., as follows: Group 1—20% kind, human, lovable persons, who do everything possible to relieve our suffering and help us. Group

2—70% the robot type, which their training appears to encourage and produce. Group 3—10% the Belsen Type. God help (I mean this seriously) all patients who have the bad luck to come under the care of this group. At the same time, I am satisfied that all but that last lot sincerely believe that what they are doing is the proper thing. Even so, after being aspirined, M. & B'd, phenobarbitoned and morphine tableted almost into the grave, I still do not pretend to understand how any intelligent practitioner expects to poison his seriously ill patients into health.

UNINFORMED CRITICISM The one thing I do object to is the overbearing attitude of the medicals toward all other kinds of practitioners. When I asked for my X-ray plates and stated I wanted to show them to a man who was an osteopath and a Nature Cure practitioner, my Dr. went off the deep end, called these people charlatans and rogues, and then admitted he knew nothing about them. In common fairness, how could he be so dogmatic in his condemnation when he had no direct experience? Although I had paid for the plates he would not hand them over.* Some years ago another Dr. friend asked for my opinion about his game of golf. After pointing out some very obvious faults I remarked " You are a poor golfer even if you are a good Dr. With so many patients relying on your skill it is a good job you do not make so many mistakes in your professional work as you do in your golf!" His candid reply was: " I do make a lot of mistakes, but in our profession we bury our blunders. So no one but ourselves is any the wiser." Is this not sailing very near the charlatan class? Before I close I must mention the " Tait Bequest " (mentioned at the end of this book). Apparently the miscarriage cannot be rectified, but we can see that the poor around Edinburgh do not suffer because of this travesty of justice. The enclosed cheque (the cost of less than one year's cigarettes to the average smoker) is sent in the hope that 1,000 others who have benefited from N.C. will do the same T. A.

Attached to the foregoing was a cheque for £50 and an accompanying letter which read, in part, as follows:— " The statement I enclose is rather formal, but my former Dr. always said when annoyed with my questions, ' You ought to write a book!' I replied: If ever I get off this d - - - - d frame I will, and the title will be The Years the Locusts have Eaten by The Man Who Came Back from Hell! ' " The attached writing may be too long and rambling to be of any use. If so, throw it into the wastepaper basket and no offence will be taken, but if you can * Here also—as mentioned earlier—when pressure was brought to bear, the excuse made was that the X-ray plates and tissue specimens (from which a positive diagnosis had been made) had all been mislaid. " With sincere regrets . . ."

make use of it I shall be delighted. I have omitted the remarks about the specialists which so amused the patients at Kingston, because I want this statement to be perfectly fair—like a judge's summing-up: The Jury to be your readers.

TUBERCULOSIS OF THE LUNGS An illustration of what has been achieved in tuberculosis of the lungs is outlined on pp. 12 and 13 of Pasteurised Milk: A National Menace. In the case under discussion the Authority consulted refused to believe the evidence of the X-ray plates: " Such complete healing is impossible in six months! " The patient is reported 15 years later as " Fit in every way and enjoying life to the full." FROM A "JET PROPELLED" RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS PATIENT When I read the story by The Man Who Came Back From Hell, I thought I would like to relate my own story of ill-health and recovery under Nature Cure. If, by this writing even one really ill person can be induced to travel the way back to mental and physical health I would feel happy. One August night three years ago I remained awake in a struggle to retain life. I felt I was successful by only a small margin. This was the culminating experience of 16 years of martyrdom to rheumatoid arthritis and its treatment. These 16 years followed a fairly regular pattern. Almost every joint in my body became gradually affected. All were badly swollen and the pain became correspondingly worse. Then, in 1930, I was confined to bed for fully six months, the slightest movement causing agony. Some improvement followed and I began to get around a little on crutches, and then sticks. After a further two-and-a-half years I was able to resume clerical work. The programme for the next five years alternated between trying to carry on and periods off work because of an acute condition of the joints—hard swellings and great pain. And each time the increased damage and distortion was clearly visible. Early in the first illness two or three courses of an American drug were administered. After each injection my skin turned yellow. There was no improvement and in 1941 I was taken to hospital for ten weeks and given a course of gold injections. I felt queer after each—my heart pounded heavily and something unpleasant was happening inside my head. When the treatment finished these effects recurred. Six months later a second " gold " course was started. Shortly after the third injection of this course I collapsed at work—I had just newly restarted. I knew then, without a doubt, that this " wonder " treatment was literally killing me. I refused to have any more injections and told

my doctor of the effects. His " explanation " was that I had " flu." I believe my stand against further treatment saved my life, but my heart was weakened. From then till 1946, almost all my leisure time was spent in bed and I had weeks at a stretch off work. Then in July of that year came another and more serious collapse at the office, my removal home, and the fearful night previously referred to. I was told that my trouble was tonsillitis: my system was being poisoned by the septic tonsils! A month later, after digitalis treatment, I was strong enough to get up for five minutes per day. Another three months and I could walk a short distance only, accompanied by distress at the heart and in the head—and, of course, in my joints. In this condition I was discharged as fit for work! With the ordeal of the removal of my tonsils still looming ahead I felt so miserable that I really lost hope. Then (November 1946) a friend came to stay with us for a few days. He told me about the Kingston Clinic and how so many hopeless cases had recovered after treatment and vigorous self-discipline. I was doubtful about it, since years before treatment under a self-styled naturopath had failed miserably. However, I was persuaded to risk an interview. At Kingston I was told that my twisted joints couldn't be cured, but that I could probably be helped to a much better condition. For the first time I realised I had to do something myself if reasonable health was to be achieved. I was assured that the tonsil operation was unnecessary, that my heart would become stronger, the joints eventually become less troublesome, and that my health could greatly improve. Well, why not try it? I had little to lose anyway. On returning home after the interview my first act was to throw out all my bottles of medicine: quite a collection. A week later I entered Kingston for a spell of residential treatment. How can I properly express myself regarding the three years of recovery since? Within a few weeks I felt a distinct improvement in my chronically-affected joints, my heart was steadier and my diseased tonsils were clearing up in a miraculous way. This upward trend has continued and now I am experiencing a general mental and physical well-being which I had previously only dreamed about. According to Mr Thomson I have improved slowly. Maybe that is how it appears to him. To me against the earlier background of years of disappointment and suffering, progress has seemed almost jet-propelled. My present activities are something like this : Rise at 7 a.m., followed by one or two-mile walk ; then a busy day to 5.30; evenings and week-ends occupied by other interests and activities. Once or twice each week-end I walk five to six miles with great ease. One day last spring my wife and I walked twelve miles by Stirling to Dunblane, via Sheriffmuir. During these walks there is very little joint distress, and as for my heart, I am hardly aware I possess one. My wife has gone through the Nature Cure treatment with me, and therefore our ways of living are very similar. Her health has improved immeasurably— but that is another story.

Some friends and acquaintances have supported me from the start. Others grudgingly admit that Nature Cure may be O.K. for me, but it wouldn't suit them. It has surprised me to discover that despite ample practical evidence of the efficacy of this treatment, some sufferers apparently prefer to remain ill rather than give up their disease-building habits. I haven't seen my doctor during these three years, but my wife has told him the facts about my recovery. Although astounded—being the old family doctor—he expressed himself as being pleased. I have learned some home truths regarding health and disease. I know now that I was not attacked by my disease. The major factor was my own ignorance. Like other " civilised " people I over-ate of the wrong things, and permitted medical interference with acute healing processes. Nature Cure philosophy has freed me from the fear of a future crippled state, or worse. Living in accord with nature, my growing health and vitality gives me confidence for the future. My only regret is that I did not learn about real Nature Cure twenty years earlier. But better late than too late!—J.W.

ANGINA AND OTHER HEART CONDITIONS A NEW-YEAR GREETING FROM A SCOTTISH PATIENT Dear Mr Thomson, I would esteem it a favour if you would convey my kind regards to my two practitioners, Mr Leslie Thomson and Mr Milne. In addition to yourself, I feel I owe a debt of gratitude to these two gentlemen. Their personal services and sound advice will always remain something to be remembered, and something to be thankful for. For why? Well, when I think of the near approach to a physical wreck who entered Kingston in the first week of October 1949, and who left it in the last week of November of the same year full of vigour, pep, and renewed life, I certainly should be very grateful. From my bedroom window I can look out on a 200 yards incline which used to insist on two rests at least in its negotiation. Angina Pectoris, you've a wonderful way wid ye! Then six weeks care and attention at Kingston and, hey presto, I find I can climb to the top of Arthur's Seat with no' much bother at a', considering. Just here I recline in my chair, and let my mind go back to my two heart attacks. I had a suspicion that whoever it was who " called the wanderer home " was getting right down to business. And if it were a case of " Home, James," then that particular individual had no intention of " sparing the horses " or your little humble either. ". . . IF EVER " It is easy, too, to recollect the anxiety and concern on the face of that indispensable individual when trouble comes—the family, physician. How sympathetic he was and how considerate. And the questions he asked, two in particular after I had been three weeks ill:—

Do you like listening to the wireless, Jimmy? " And then on his next visit:— " Are you fond of reading? " Well do I remember my answers, and well do I remember his reply to a question of mine. " What have the wireless and a fondness for reading got to do with my troubles, doctor? " I could almost hear a tremble in his voice as he said:— " Well, Jimmy, it's like this, I'm very sorry to tell you but it will be months and months and months before you will be able to work again—if ever." And so it was, eleven of them, all told. For weeks after that I caught myself humming an old ditty of the once famous comedian, Wilkie Bard: " I don't suppose he'll do it again for months and months and months." However, things weren't just so bad as the doctor had imagined they might be. For the past ten months I have been back at my work, fit as a fiddle without Fynnon or any other salts which the adverts say are so essential to inner cleanliness. That state of health is all due to the treatment I got at your admirable clinic, to the sound advice I got from you and your practitioners, and to the fact that I have kept on practising what you good friends preached. Long may you carry on the good work, and once again my kind regards.—J.M.

FROM SOUTHERN ENGLAND: HE READ " THE HEART " . . . one is faced with the fact that there is crying need for opportunities for treatment in the majority of towns and villages in this country which cannot possibly be cared for by the few Kingston trained practitioners at present in practice. . . . What then is the answer to this problem? I know we can encourage people to read, as we have in fact done. I have a friend who has derived very great benefit from your own book on " The Heart." After having been told he would never work again he is now back at work and appears to be continuing quite well, and I feel sure that he would like to see you, but this is only one case in thousands and many more people do require more specific instruction and treatment than we lay people can give with the best will in the world to help them.—C.R.H.S.

FROM YORKSHIRE: " A DELIGHTFUL RESULT " I left Edinburgh in September and you said that perhaps I would let you know how I went on. Since the first fortnight I have never looked back. Each week has shown an improvement in general health. In a few weeks it was a real joy to be alive. I have slept better, wakening up more refreshed. I can walk quickly uphill and up steps now without any sign of palpitation; walk 18 and 20 miles in a day or cycle 40 to 50 miles and feel pleasantly tired. I still feel the cold very much but my circulation is improving. I have had no chilblains since I left Edinburgh after having them all summer, and my hands are a much better colour. I purchased

Constipation and Our Civilisation and have not taken a laxative since September and have a regular bowel movement every day. I do all the daily exercises conscientiously, also the cold splash and keep to the diet and would go to much more trouble to have had such a satisfying and delightful result.—E.B.

IS IT TOO SIMPLE? Common questions ask if treatment can be carried out at home; how long the cure is likely to last, and if it is suitable for old people. This letter from an eighty-year-old correspondent* gives a sufficient answer to the first part: ". . . a year ago I was locked in every limb. To make a long story short, after four months without a doctor I became unlocked and again carry on all my work by myself. " The people who had decided I was going to die, when they saw me in the garden, wanted to know what I had done. I replied ' it is too simple, you wouldn't do it.' " Unfortunately, my relatives got the wind up fearing I should die without a doctor's assistance, so, anxious not to leave worries behind, I signed the Health register form when I had recovered. Still hoping to die on my feet.— Yours, C.C."

DOES IT LAST? Here is part of a report from a patient of twenty-five years ago:— After two years of misery and six months confined to the house you did my stomach and bowels proud! I am now 75 and for twenty years never an ache or bit of trouble of any kind.—J.S.

And another:— I am now travelling my 88th year. It's over 25 years since I consulted Mr Thomson and I have never had to consult a doctor of any kind since. I have no disease, no pain and continue to follow the rules and diet of Nature Cure.—G.P.

Such letters encourage us enormously. AN ILLEGAL CURE An elderly lady, making her semi-annual report just a week or two ago, came to me first in 1913 with what had been diagnosed as carcinoma of the breast. Within eighteen months the whole ugly tumour had dried up, and has given no trouble since. Having * I have never met this vital and courageous lady but she subscribes to our monthly journal Rude Health and now follows the Nature Cure way of life. It is obvious from her letters that her philosophy is part and parcel of an alert mentality.

outlasted all her contemporaries she lives alone and does all her own housework. According to her consultant of 1913, she should have been dead at least thirty-eight years. Instead he has been long dead, while she goes from strength to strength. But I forget myself. It is not lawful to me to mention that cancer is curable. The drug doctors can't do it, so nobody else is allowed to try! Thus is the good name of " medical science " preserved. As to what can be done by home treatment, here is a matter-offact illustration from an unknown correspondent, reproduced from the Kingston Chronicle for September 1945. (In this case the diagnosis was sarcoma, but so far as Nature Cure results are concerned it might just as readily have been rheumatism, phthisis, leukemia, nephritis or heart disease). I owe you a debt of gratitude for your book.* In 1935 my wife became affected by sarcoma of the right tonsil and underwent an operation. She also had X-ray treatment. The surgeon who operated told me previously that if she were suffering from cancer she would not live for more than nine months, in spite of any treatment. However, I had been studying the principles of Nature Cure and with difficulty persuaded her to adopt the regimen, and she became moderately healthy. Unfortunately, she returned to her former diet of meat, with tea and coffee and a habit of eating sweets in rather large quantities. The result was a further operation and, finally, a serious operation which entailed removal of part of her palate. It was after this last operation that I happened to come across your book. Fortunately, my wife followed the advice given in chapter VII. and, very much to the astonishment of her doctor and the surgeon, has remained free of disease ever since. The last operation took place in 1941 and my wife now seems in better health than ever. I am fully convinced that if she had continued her former habits of diet she would probably have lost her life . . . The point is that so long as she kept to the general principles of the diet advised by you she continued in good health, but when she departed from this course the disease reappeared. She was extremely difficult to convince, and I may say it was mainly as a result of your book that she finally saw her errors. Your book deserves serious study by all who are afflicted with this terrible disease."

SHOCK FOR A HOSPITAL MATRON Another lady had just retired after fifty years in the nursing profession. She came to our clinic with the statement that she had * Why Chronic Disease, i.e. this book in one of its earlier editions.

been interested for many years. Kingston was her first port of call as soon as she was free from professional obligations. By the time she had spent two months with us she had become most enthusiastic. Not only had her health improved out of all knowledge, but she had watched something she had never seen before during her whole professional life. This was her enthusiastic finding: " Every single patient here is getting well! " That routine, everyday fact to us, was to her an almost unbelievable phenomenon. Especially so as it was all done without streptomycin, penicillin, the sulphas or even coloured lights. All achieved merely by persuading each patient to live reasonably and to learn something about the whys and wherefores of it all. A DRUGGIST'S UTOPIA I find it difficult to believe that the drug profession wields such control over our thinking as you indicate. You imply that even our laws are largely dictated by them. Would you tell us exactly how a medical doctor would set about getting a law enacted without consent of parliament? —L.D., Durham. I imagine that this questioner has been reading the leaflet on the Health Service published in 1945. But nowhere did I suggest that medical doctors have the power to issue legal edicts in the direct and overriding manner indicated by my questioner. At that time the Health Service was under discussion and I drew attention to the fact that servitors of the Drug Cartel were to be found in all kinds of unexpected places. The men in control had played their cards so well that they were donating nominated Professors to Universities and giving out scholarships in all directions. The students, when they graduated, were then placed in key positions up and down the country. HOW GREAT MEN ARE MADE As was to be expected, these men, with that powerful backing, have taken root in their new surroundings and flourished apace. In every large community they are now to be found as leading citizens, occupying such positions as Members of Parliament, Principals of Universities, Heads of Technical Colleges, Mayors, Provosts, City

Councillors, Chairmen of Ways and Means Committees, " Food Chemists " for comestible manufacturing companies, etc., etc. Naturally these armies of men in strategic positions have remained under a moral—or perhaps I should say a certain— obligation to their most generous benefactors. I do not believe that such a situation arose by accident, and I cannot doubt the decisive trend this gives to all " health " legislation. Also over each of these devious routes must arrive no inconsiderable material gains for the thoughtful planners in the background. The point to note is that there has been no real attempt at concealment. Everything has been meticulously legal and aboveboard. There is no reason why it should be otherwise. There are always well-informed representatives of the drug traffic—a hard core of medical doctors, deputies of drug companies, delegates from radium refineries and serum supply houses, as well as pharmaceutical and other trade union officials—in Parliament, sufficient to ensure that no restraints are placed upon their Patron Saints: the modern alchemists who " turn metals of drossiest ore to perfect gold." GOOD NEWS FOR DRUGGISTS On the other hand, these activities in high places are not featured in our topical press. But every now and again the facts are there for those who care to look for them: mostly tucked away in small paragraphs filling up odd corners. Consider well this tiny but quite perfect example: Mr Hugh N. Linstead, M.P., Secretary of the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, addressing members of the Edinburgh and South Scotland branch of the Society, last night spoke on " The Pharmacist's Position in the New National Health Service." Under the new scheme, said Mr Linstead, chemists would have to dispense twice as much medicine.—Edinburgh Dispatch (13: 1:45).

A most comforting message for the druggists! And the man who passes along the good news is Hugh N. Linstead, M.P., Secretary to the Pharmaceutical Society of G.B. The pattern keeps on repeating. Note that the undisguised and enthusiastic support of the pharmacists for the Health Service had a strictly business foundation. " Health Service " should be for health, but the hard purpose served is much more intensive than the words " twice as much medicine " might

seem to warrant. (Incidentally, genuine health would call for no drugs at all). As most observers have noticed, the output of " miracle drugs " has grown enormously with the passing years. What few detached onlookers realise is that each such drug brings in its train an intriguing group of " new diseases." These in turn create a demand for other " new miracle drugs " to control the new symptoms, and so on ad infinitum. The greater the quantity, and the more efficient the new drugs—in breaking up the cleansing efforts of the patient—the more certain is he to join that steadily increasing group whose epitaphs read more or less like this: " Just ten days after his discharge from hospital, he suddenly collapsed and died while in the best of health." Astounding trustfulness on the part of the public, but opening up unlimited possibilities for an ever-developing drug traffic. FULL EMPLOYMENT This advice was given to one of our patients by a highly placed pharmacist friend just as the Health Service was getting under way: Put every penny you can spare into drug shares. All over the country they are enlarging their works and planning for at least a 300 per cent. increased demand as soon as the National Health Service gets going.*

By far the greatest advertising income for the newspapers comes from the chemical cartel and its subsidiaries. That takes care of most Editorial Opinion. In the medical world at least as strong a bias is introduced because practically all information about drugs reaches the medical student from Professors or Lecturers who have reached their positions with the unstinted help and encouragement of their high-pressure sponsors. We have not yet reached the depths portrayed by George Orwell in his " 1984," but there remain few aspects of life untouched by the " educational " work of that resolute and tightly interlocking Direc-torate which fosters Disease and War. In all matters relating to drugs and disease, their control is absolute. It covers every form of publicity from topical press and news-reel to pulpit and television. * According to Sir William Marshall, Chairman of the Health Executive Council for Lanarkshire, the present outlay for medicines per head of the population is over 600% above pre-war cost. (1:7: 53).

WHEN SEA-GOING SCIENCE WENT WRONG Go back just a few years, to the days when Commander Campbell was the favourite member of the Brains Trust. He told two humorous and apparently innocent stories about his own medical experiments. On the first occasion he told of one ship where, on the sick-bay wall, was exhibited a chart of the human body, marked off in numbered squares. The medicine box contained bottles with corresponding numbers. The idea was that when a patient complained of pains in square 17 he was given a dose from bottle number 17, and so on. So far so good, but he went on to tell how, when he ran out of number 8 medicine, he mixed equal quantities of numbers 3 and 5, and the results were just as good. His second medical story told of his ship sailing toward a smallpox-infected port, so all the crew had to be vaccinated. All went well until he ran out of vaccine. Not to be thwarted, he sent to the galley for a tin of condensed milk, and the result was perfect: " the condensed milk was every bit as good. They all ' took ' "! The immediate result was Campbell's banishment not only from the Brains Trust but from all other B.B.C. programmes. Not the least illuminating aspect of that incident was the complete anonymity of the forces behind that move, and the smoothness and the speed with which the sentence was carried out. From that time, silence, unexplained but eloquent, has descended upon the hearty Commander. IN PARLIAMENT From more than one M.P. I have learned that an almost exactly similar situation exists in the House except that it works ante rather than post. According to my information, the ambitious back-bencher is well warned in advance not to criticise, or even tell jokes in public about any prevailing medical fashion. Cabinet rank is not for those who would be so foolish. So for political climbers as with Campbell, the unspoken wishes of the drug profession can be, and have been, decisive in vitally important ways. The relationship of this hypersensitivity and the intense resentments of the profession so far as it covers the question of drugs, presents no problem. What is difficult to explain is their almost

equally outraged feelings when attention is directed toward unwholesomeness pertaining to foods or feeding habits, or smoking and drinking, or even the place of psychological situations in relation to disease causation. It is a difficult subject, but I suggest it to be an unconscious awareness of the dangers inherent in admitting the thin end of the wedge, as it were. Once habits and thoughts are accepted as causes of disease the high drama of " fighting disease germs " would lose much of its interest for the lay public. That would be sheer tragedy for the drug profession. On October 30th, 1952, the American surgeon, Alton Ochsner, addressing a gathering of doctors in New Orleans, suggested that the great increase in lung cancer was directly due to increased smoking: Dr. Ochsner sadly remarked: " a great many doctors are heavy smokers." Meanwhile over his attentive doctor-audience the air was blue with tobacco smoke.

If Dr. Ochsner leaves it at that he is unlikely to suffer much damage, but he treads on dangerous ground. A KING WHO MIGHT HAVE LIVED It was pathetic to look on as King George VI passed through the routine degenerative changes in the circulatory system common to heavy smokers at his stage of life. Meanwhile his doctors and surgeons failed to insist, publicly if need be, that for his own good, and for the sake of the Nation, he must stop smoking forthwith.* Nothing so simple as that. Despite a widespread belief to the contrary, remarkably few physicians and practically no surgeons are interested in health maintenance or health regeneration. Essentially, and all the time, they are fascinated by " cures ". That in turn, and in all truth, means that the modern practitioner meets his patient only at the point of the needle or the knife. * Even that single change of habit alone might easily have produced an almost complete reabsorption of the minute, growing areas of scar tissue in the leg and coronary arteries of the patient. But such a recovery, too, would have been a serious setback for the medicating industry. Once get that simple fact across to the public: that it is only necessary to stop doing the things that are making us ill, and we begin to get well, and the medicating idea would collapse like a punctured balloon. The whole " curing " business is a ghastly superstition that produces innumerable tragedies month-by-month and year-by-year. Let the reader get this fact clear in his mind : that it is simply not possible to poison any patient into health. Once that clean-cut truth is accepted the whole phantas-magoric, but deadly, illusion of " miracle drugs " should disappear for ever.

So when the King found he could not walk his doctors advised surgery, and the surgeons operated to " cure " his intermittent claudication (increasing hardening of the leg arteries and threatened gangrene). Next a cancerous degeneration of the lungs was " cured " by a marvellous operation until he developed coronary thrombosis (blocking of the nutrient artery of the heart). The statement issued after his death only told us that " All the King's arteries were hardening far beyond his years . . . the blood slowed down in one of the King's hardened arteries. As it slowed it thickened and formed a large clot. The King's life was at an end." CAREER DIPLOMACY Not a hint about the part played by tobacco. And from the rulers of the profession, no word of censure for the practitioners who kept quiet at the beginning of the trouble when their voices should have sounded loud and clear. Neither they nor the gullible public blamed the Royal doctors for allowing such a situation to develop. But we must look at it from their point of view too. For any one of them to have been overheard advising more wholesome food and the complete abandonment of the smoking habit would have been tantamount to commiting professional hara-kiri. No second chance would have been permitted in such an intensely spot-lighted situation. In the higher ranks of the profession, not only would the blunderer postulated above have been considered as guilty of professional mis-conduct, it has been likewise with practitioners who have produced evidence of some of the most valuable health-fostering discoveries of recent times. For an orthodox practitioner to bring his clientele to a state of good health, and maintain them there by encouraging them to eat wholesome foods is apparently disgraceful. UNPOPULAR FINDINGS Think of what happened to Dr. MacDonald of Dr. Barnardo's Homes when he published his health-and-life-fostering finding about what occurred when he gave raw milk in place of pasteurised to the children under his care (14 times more tuberculosis among the pasteurised milk consumers than in those on raw milk). He had to resign from his position. His Directors did not exult or even give small praise, neither did they blame. All that happened was a sad

leave-taking. Those who are interested may find fuller details in Pasteurised Milk: A National Menace, by the present author. Exactly paralleled by what happened to the Edinburgh Headmaster who for 6½ years fed his children on honest N.C. foods. Throughout these years his school built up a unique record: not a single epidemic in all that time, although his scholars were constantly in contact with those of neighbouring schools wherein many epidemics flared up from time to time. As soon as he told how it was done, he too had to resign rather than accept definite orders to revert to the earlier, defective and altogether unsatisfactory feeding of the children. (Particulars, pp. 72-73 of Healthy Childhood, by Jessie R. Thomson. During 6½ years on better food the accident rate fell to almost zero.) So I exist at the opposite extreme from my questioner. I find it impossible not to believe that from birth to death, the British public are conditioned by closely-knit groups of men who, for all practical purposes, direct political thought in their own fields and subsidise what is called learning in our Universities, Medical Schools and many other Centres of The Higher Education. THE MENTAL FACTOR Could you clarify one point for me: why should the mental attitude of the patient be so all important? You say that if a person follows Nature Cure treatment but does not actually believe in it, good results are unlikely. Could you give a simple illustration to explain just how the patient's attitude of mind brings about such a result?—L.O., Stokenchurch. The power of the mind in all disease conditions is a fact not appreciated by the general public, and even less so by the medical profession. We preach it, and accordingly, that is one of the common criticisms hurled at Nature Cure: It is just mental healing—always spoken as though mental healing were something to be ashamed of ! Other detractors announce that Nature Cure is all diet: others say that it is all exercises or body-posture or ways of breathing or long walks, and still others claim it to be merely Christian Science or eat no breakfast or eat grass, or hydrotherapy or just suggestion, psychology, manipulation, osteopathy, chiropractic and all kinds of other " justs " and " merelys."

To illustrate how decisive an attitude of mind may be, here are two letters from a prospective patient in London. The first reads: I have been suffering from rheumatoid arthritis for the past 10 or 12 years. I suffer mostly in my hands and wrists and in my feet and ankles, where, in both instances, the joints have become distorted and the muscles weakened considerably. A fellow member of my club mentioned to me that a colleague of his, who had similarly suffered from the same complaint, had received considerable help and relief from a diet recommended by you. May I have an appointment please?

In accordance with the request an appointment time was made and accepted. Then, a few days later, the following letter was received: In all the circumstances it would appear that my proposed appointment with you should be cancelled. I have a monthly blood test at the local hospital, and interview the hospital doctor immediately afterwards. When I mentioned that I proposed to have an interview with a diet specialist, he told me that if my complaint had been such that a diet would have helped, he would have prescribed one long ago. I regret therefore that I do not propose keeping the suggested appointment.

Apart from the confusion of Nature Cure with " diet," on the face of it, here we have a false assessment of values along with an attitude of mind which, so far as we are concerned, is final and decisive. On the advice of a medico (practising a system which has failed to produce the desired results over a long period of years) Nature Cure is dismissed without trial, despite the knowledge and evidence of good results in a similar case. A weak and distorted sense of values has decided the issue more than the weak and distorted joints. Lack of understanding can be almost as damaging as panic or despair, even if it takes longer to become manifest to the onlooker. Nevertheless we prefer that clean-cut break rather than an involved and damaging relationship that crops up several times in the course of each year. THE UNWILLING PATIENT It begins when an ailing individual comes to us on the urgent advice, or even under the considerable coercion of some overzealous disciple of Nature Cure. Quite often the patient has been pushed so far and so fast that he has had no time to consider the matter fully. Furthermore the enthusiastic advocate may be paying the bills, so that it would appear that all the patient has to do is to sit back and reap the benefits until he becomes well.

In practice that simple outcome is seldom possible. All too often, long before we have seen him, intense, even if unconscious, resentments have been stirred up so that the patient's attention is shut off from all the deeper meanings behind Nature Cure. For us the problem may be beyond solution. For example the patient may be an employee of his would-be benefactor. He would much rather have been left alone to carry out the advice of his medical practitioner, but he cannot say so to anybody. Above all he cannot discuss his difficulty with his practitioner because the information might get across to his employer, and his job be jeopardised. In such circumstances, even where the patient makes an honest attempt to conform to the letter of our advice, he has to engineer so many evasions that he becomes increasingly restive about the trap in which he finds himself. The resultant nervous and muscular tensions may completely block any return to normality. In comparative cases (i.e., from a physical point of view) the helpful and co-operative patient quickly becomes well, whereas such unhappy and resentful individuals commonly lose ground, unless or until they get back to the methods of their choice. ADVICE TO PREACHERS The moral would seem to be that while we have to rely upon the goodwill and recommendations of our former patients, it is advisable for our adherents not to become too intense. Above all please do not insist that all your friends must forthwith take up the Nature Cure way of life. As Fra Elbertus has advised: " You can preach a better sermon with your life than with your lips." So perhaps the best plan is to give your friends an opportunity to judge by results. Quietly get yourself so well that they cannot fail to become interested and convinced. Even so let them make the first move. INVALIDISM: LAY AND PROFESSIONAL That one's own thoughts can do harm to the physical health is now generally accepted, but is it possible for some one to be hurt by the evil thoughts from, or words spoken by an angry neighbour?— S.E.P., Hendon. Much would depend upon the geographical situation; more upon the person's relationship with the neighbour, and most of all upon the

personality and the mental state of the individual at the receiving end of the unhappy wishful thinking. For example, consider a Kikuyu native of Kenya who finds a dead cat hanging on a bush outside his hut as he steps out of doors in the early morning. Nothing of a physical nature happens at all, but if he harbours feelings of guilt about some of the Mau-Mau verbot relating to collaboration with whites, he is liable to become seriously ill and die forthwith! " Destroyed by the power of the oath," so his neighbours say. Assuming that you have learned of that peculiar effect for the first time, consider, Dear Reader, your own response to a dead cat first seen by you hanging from a similar bush in your own suburban front garden to-morrow morning! Would it be, by then, quite so easily dismissed as " just a nonsensical idea " as it could have been five minutes ago? Perhaps, but perhaps not. But carry the thought a bit longer and further away—make it next month, in a lonely farmhouse in the White Highlands of Kenya, early one wet morning. So far as you are aware you are all alone; not a soul black or white within two miles. Then suddenly you notice that a dead cat has been placed on a sapling just outside your bedroom window. Honestly now! Would your heart continue to beat as quietly as it did in Hendon a month earlier (i.e., even after you had read the beginning of this reply)? I would imagine not, and, if my guess is right, that means that both time and space are factors in this queer business. Once the situation has been accepted, especially from early childhood, the silliest of effects can be produced—but always provided the person to be hurt is a long-established believer in the possibility (or probability) of the phenomenon. BLACK MAGIC Likewise with a common practice in certain parts of Switzerland. Apparently it is an accepted method for the young women in some cantons to take revenge upon a rival by leaving a handkerchief on the roadway or in a passageway, so that the unwary victim picks it up. The damage is done as soon as the handkerchief opens out. All that the perpetrator of the scheme has to do is to tie as many knots on one or two of the corners as can be safely concealed by the remainder of the apparently carelessly dropped material. As soon as the rival picks it up and sees these knots she knows that she has been caught, and by

the next day she will have developed the same number of warts on her face as there were knots in the handkerchief—to the considerable detriment of her appearance. There may be much wailing and gnashing of teeth, but so long as she knows of, and accepts, the power of the curse, just as surely as with the Kikuyu native, there is no escape. That, in a minor way, is precisely the " Black Magic " of the ancients. As a young student I saw the same trick played upon a man by " suggestion " under hypnosis. By the next morning quite a large pimple had developed on the tip of his nose, while he, poor fellow, had no slightest conscious memory of the whys and wherefores of its sudden appearance. (Incidentally, that was the straw in the wind that first aroused my suspicions about the wholly benign background to medical hypnosis as applied to the patient. Apparently our lecturer saw in it merely an uproariously funny practical joke!) But in an entirely different province of the mind quite devastating effects can follow from the most innocent of remarks—everything again pivoting upon certain acceptances within the deeper layers of the unconscious. AFTER AN ACCIDENT One of my first patients in Edinburgh, soon after I had returned from the States, was a middle-aged woman who had been deprived of the use of her legs some years earlier through falling down a lift shaft. Both in the eastern U.S.A. city, where the accident occurred, and in Edinburgh, her native city, to which she had returned some months later, eminent specialists had diagnosed such severe damage to the spine that it would be impossible for her ever to walk again. I was informed of all these circumstances when first called in, but as a brash young practitioner who had yet to meet failure in any case tackled up to that time, I announced that in my opinion the combined procedures and modalities of Nature Cure might just turn the trick. This was quite my most serious case in Britain up to that time, but results came quickly and were most gratifying to every one concerned. Within a few weeks this woman was walking the length of the street, approximately 500 yards, for her daily treatments. In approximately two months she was beginning to enjoy quite long walks in the country. She passed through her first healing crisis with a splendid amount of reabsorption of scar tissue where the injuries had

left great thickening along the lumbar spine, and soon thereafter the legs became almost normal in appearance and function. One day, just before the treatments finished, she had walked five miles in the forenoon and again in the afternoon to her own great delight and enjoyment. AN EARLY TRIUMPH Naturally that speedy response in view of the previous history and prognoses both in U.S.A. and G.B. aroused interest. Medical practitioners previously consulted and a fairly large section of the Edinburgh public were watching, and it looked as though my practice had been fully established for all time. Then, quite suddenly, the whole thing folded up. One morning instead of arriving for treatment at the appointed time the lady sent a message to say that she was in bed and unable to move her legs. They were " just as bad as ever," so she had decided not to continue with the treatments. As there had been no indications of impending crisis, and all nerve and muscle responses had been improving consistently, I naturally called in to examine her. At first I was told she would not see me, and even when I did obtain audience she was adamant: I was not to touch her, and she had no intention of undergoing any more treatment at my hands. As things turned out that was. the last time I saw the woman. Through friends I was told that thereafter she remained in bed and would make no effort to leave it. A few weeks after my last interview with her, her brother who had been instrumental in getting her to undertake the treatment, and who had been an enthusiastic helper toward her recovery, called in to apologise for what he called his sister's bad behaviour. According to the brother's story, a friend from the city in America which she had been visiting at the time of the accident, had called in unexpectedly. Naturally the friend was just as astonished as every one else to find her so fully recovered. But she had made an unfortunate, indeed a fatal remark: " Now you will have to let the Insurance Company know of your recovery." This was the first I had heard of insurance, but the brother explained that she was receiving compensation at the rate of $25 per week (at that time £5; quite a large sum of money then), and

according to him, the prospect of losing that income had decided the issue. As soon as the friend had gone she retired to bed, and refused to make any effort on her own behalf. She reverted to complete invalidism again. SELF-IMPOSED INVALIDISM Naturally the enthusiastic group who had been interested in this new Nature Cure idea just as suddenly decided that the improvement had been " only a flash in the pan "—an argument I could not answer. But for me an even more interesting aspect developed. Just a few months later, the lady died from, as I surmise, the mental tensions built up through her self-imposed and quite unnecessary invalidism. At the same time the brother's explanation gave me great comfort along with considerable insight into what can happen to a patient from an outside stimulus—even if all the damage is really carried out within the patient's own personality and physiology. I have used that experience on many occasions since to bring patients back to the straight and narrow path! The professional invalid is not peculiar to any one country. A notorious example of the species has been making the rounds of American hospitals. He is a gentleman with numerous aliases aged 70-ish but older-looking, who makes a routine of collapsing in the streets of strange towns. Taken to local hospital he announces himself as a veteran of the American Civil War and claims to be 104 years old. He is described as " with a strong beard, sparrowy build and parchment skin." Apparently he enjoys the hospitality of these hospitals until a fund is opened on his behalf. Having collected the cash, he moves on to carry out the same procedure, sometimes within hours, sometimes weeks later, in another State. He has broken all records for number of times arrested in various States for what Americans call " gypping " (playing on the sympathies of individuals and associations for a hand-out). Apparently, because of his Munchausen syndrome (a rare ability to control the phrenic nerve so that the diaphragm flutters), he holds the record for more mentions in the A.M.A. journal than any other living individual. This gift, along with his loud complaints of chest pains, enables him to fool nurses and doctors wherever he goes.

NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE A somewhat analagous situation, but involving large groups of people, would appear to be developing in Britain. According to a report issued in November 1952, " The average number of employees [in government factories] who stay from work owing to sickness is nearly doubled in four years." In matters involving health and disease ratios of factory workers it is politically unpopular to suggest an honest solution. But perhaps the foregoing histories may be considered as providing clue number one. Clue number two lies in a statement that in individual cases the sickness seldom extends beyond 13 weeks. I leave it at that. (Perhaps, in passing, it might be well to mention that just four years earlier a scheme had been introduced whereby every worker in a government factory became entitled to a period of thirteen weeks of sick leave on full pay. At this point dangerous thoughts obtrude). Which reminds me of a splendid letter sent from a Nature Cure patient in Manchester to the then M.o.H., Mr Aneurin Bevan, during the planning of the Health Service: " Dear Sir,— I write to ask that you should look carefully into the possibility of promoting the treatment of illness by other means than the usual medical lines (which so often fail, and lead to chronic disease). " At the age of twenty I contracted rheumatoid arthritis very badly, and was bedfast for over two years, then transferred to a wheel-chair, helpless and unable to walk at all. During that time I had had treatment from specialists and doctors—every kind of drug and injection—also one year in the —— Royal Hospital. This went on for over four years and I was . . . going steadily worse. During that time my faith in cure by medicine slowly ebbed, and it gradually dawned on me that the medical profession could do nothing to restore me. All this time I had received National Health benefits and my insurance company thought they'd be making payments for the whole of my life——— " BUT " I came across Nature Cure treatment which appealed to my logic as being the only way to real health. It is too long a story to tell here, but a scientific diet, fresh air, water treatment, exercise, all helped to eliminate rubbish via the vital organs, in contrast to the burden they had received from taking all the strong drugs previously. " I steadily began to improve and within 18 months I had discarded the wheel-chair and had improved sufficiently to walk about and earn my living in

my home by office work. From that day I have not drawn a penny from the National Health Insurance. " My thoughts are for other sufferers who are on the downward path of illness, and I ask you to please look into this question. Mr J. C. Thomson, Kingston Clinic, Edinburgh, has supervised my treatment, and I am sure he would be only too pleased to put his knowledge before you. I may say that all doctors are hostile, but as this treatment brings results far beyond anything I have dreamed about, their opinion should be side-tracked, and this can only be done by some one with an open mind like yourself. It does not occur to them that by curing some mild illness by some strong drug they are laying the foundations for another far worse disease such as cancer. " For the sake of all people that are ill and more so, to prevent others from sickness, I ask you please to investigate this logical treatment. Perhaps you could arrange to have patients supervised whilst having this treatment, and see for yourself. The final result is a clean wholesome body that will resist any disease. I think you will agree that the human body is a wonderful mechanism— couldn't you help to give it a fair chance of survival. " I'm not a faddist, or a crank, but belong to a hard-working Lancashire family. Thanks to Nature Cure I was able to walk to the polls—and vote Labour."—Yours sincerely, D.H.

A WILLING TOOL I like that final thrust. Had Mr Bevan been a free agent I imagine it could have produced results. Unfortunately he was, at that time, a willing tool in the hands of a group of medical advisers. The situation was well summed up by Professor Harold Laski during the Health Service Week of Feb. 1946: It (the Socialist Medical Association) has captured the Labour Party; indeed it may be said to have made the Labour Party its instrument in its great adventure.

At that time the Labour Party were on a " Planning " spree; anything that had been planned took on a sacrosanct quality. Only an occasional voice of sanity was heard. Here are two examples: " NATURE CURES " To many people the proposed National Health Service . . . has peculiar difficulties. What about osteopaths, and like practitioners of what they call natural methods of healing? Unless these practitioners are allowed the same facilities as the ordinary doctor, a heavy handicap will be placed upon . . . [their patients who] . . . will have to pay State contributions for a service they will not use because they think

that natural methods of healing are based upon an entirely different theory of the cause and cure of disease, and millions, it is said, can testify to the success of those methods.—Editorial, Edinburgh Dispatch. In certain circumstances, a doctor may feel that a man's arm or leg should come off, but is the patient to have no say in the dismemberment of his own body?* He should have the whole say. Again, it may be that in the course of a long illness, a patient will lose faith in his doctor. In the patient's interest in a circumstance like that, there should be a suitable safeguard—power of appeal or liberty to change the doctor. Discipline can be a great aid in a person's recovery, but the trouble is to decide on the right amount of it. —Editorial, Edinburgh Evening News.

A CONCESSION The Editor might have added: " and who is to apply it? " However, despite the contrary medical advice Bevan was receiving from his power-drunk instrument wielders, these and similar protests did have their effect. A few weeks later he made this further announcement: I do not propose to interfere with private medical practices. If any one wishes to buy the services of a doctor, herbalist, or any one else, I do not propose to stop him.

That was an entirely different attitude from the one previously attributed to him. Always it had been intended that the drug doctors, the herbalists and the patent medicine vendors were to carry on. Bevan's concession lay in these three decisive words: " or any one else." Even so it removed none of the threats intended to keep the patient obedient: enforced payment (for the unused services of the drug doctors), loss of benefits, fines, imprisonments and so forth, for the ailing man or woman who, against medical instructions, followed the advice of a Nature Cure practitioner. A CANCELLATION Invalidism may arise as a result not only of a patient's uncooperative or perverse mental attitude, but just as much it may * The penalties for resisting mutilation (or drug poisoning, serums, radium treatment, etc.), were to include loss of benefit and severe fines. However, we were to have one safeguard: individually we could select the man who was to have these enormous powers over our lives—complete freedom to choose any practitioner, so long as he was a drug doctor! Another significant fact. Unlike the coalowners and the railway shareholders, the naturopaths were not to be compensated by the State. For all such, a simple extinction was planned.

arise from fixed ideas among people with whom the patient comes in daily contact. The bad effects in such a situation often develop without any one being consciously aware of what is going on. Some time ago I was consulted by an old lady who had spent most of her life in the far East. She happily agreed to take up residential treatment as soon as a room became available. A day or two later she was on the telephone to cancel the arrangement. This was her explanation:— " Personally I am all in agreement with what you told me but my husband is a Colonel retired from the Indian Army and he holds that anything which questions any of the edicts of either the Church or Medicine would weaken the British Empire." That husband's intense feelings about abstractions made it impracticable for her to undergo a treatment which should have brought her to a much better state of health. UNDOUBTED " SUCCESSES " My doctor tells me that both surgery and certain of the new drugs are producing undoubted cures in cancerous conditions, always provided the opportunity is given for them to apply these remedies in the early stages of the disease.—M.S., Edinburgh. The great difficulty about that kind of claim is that while anybody can say " early stages," nobody knows just at what point the cancerous bias is introduced. From a Nature Cure point of view " early " may mean several generations back. Short term solutions are unlikely to achieve success because so many factors are overlooked by those who accept the tumour as an entity, and look upon it as " the disease." Wrong feeding is the essential basis for any decay in a living body, e.g., carious teeth. But once decay has become established, even in teeth, it is not possible to eradicate fully the results of prolonged malnutrition in one generation. When the same question was put at a Kingston Question Hour our Mr Milne replied that the claims for an early cure could be understood on the basis that what the surgeons cut away were merely harmless, benign tumours. At that Question Hour one of our patients spoke up for the

surgeons and the medical profession. According to him their cures were quite genuine. Any statement to the contrary must be based upon newspaper stories. These, he said, had no foundation in fact. As this patient happened to be a medical practitioner, a certain amount of bias must be allowed for. His attention was drawn to the (for him) awkward fact that while approximately 99 per cent. of newspaper stories and magazine articles enthusiastically uphold every announcement of any medical or surgical claim to have produced this or that remarkable cure, not a word ever appears about the vastly more usual recoveries achieved under Nature Cure instructions. FILTERED NEWS Indeed they have little choice. By an agreement reached between the B.M.A. and the newspaper proprietors (21:3:44) " nothing of a knocking nature " against the medical profession is to be published in any British newspaper. Accordingly the truth about their complete failure in cancer and other nutritional disorders is seldom if ever mentioned. But let there be even the slightest hint that maybe somebody— providing the somebody is an orthodox practitioner—is once again, very nearly about to succeed, and main page headlines acclaim " another great advance for modern medicine." My own impression agrees with that of many honest medicals both in Great Britain and U.S.A. who see the various alleged scientific investigations into cancer as wholly bogus. Probably because it pulls in large sums of money it appears to have fallen into the hands of groups of financial geniuses, who gain a certain kind of medical support by handing out well-paid " jobs for the boys." In exchange they receive apparently full and uncritical—if low grade— professional backing. Their blatant schemes are full of flowery promise and emotional appeals and, so far as can be judged by public support, they go from strength to strength. But one point stands out from all these involved arrangements: the last person to be given consideration is the pitifully ailing patient. " UNREASONABLE " MOTHER'S TRIUMPH Some time ago a letter reached me from a Manchester reader which provides an excellent indication of how much a reader of Nature Cure literature can learn over the years! Here is his short but

sufficient letter, with its two enclosures. You, dear Reader, must judge for yourself whether his case is convincing. " I enclose cuttings from two consecutive issues of Time magazine:" TOO MUCH TO BEAR Just after Christmas, thin, black-haired Mrs Montell Purcell saw something which made her turn cold: her pig-tailed, four-year-old daughter, Carolyn Joan, was holding toys close to her face as she played in the Purcell's dingy little house at Alpharetta (pop. 647), Ga. Smiling the child explained why: it was the only way she could see them. Mrs Purcell, and her husband, Frank, an unemployed stone-mason, hurried Carolyn Joan to a doctor. But the mother could not bring herself to believe the dreadful medical alternatives: the child would have to lose both eyes or die. Mrs Purcell's first baby had died " sudden like " in 1937, and it seamed impossible that God could permit such cruelty twice. She took her daughter home, put her to bed, and sat up beside her, night after night, waiting for her to get better. But Carolyn Joan's eyesight got steadily worse. Last week the Purcell's brought the little girl to Atlanta's Grady Memorial Hospital, to seek hope from a team of four specialists. After sending Carolyn Joan to play in the hospital corridor, the specialists confirmed the original diagnosis. The little girl had retino-blastoma, a cancer of the eyes. The doctors urged the parents to let them remove both eyes immediately. Frank Purcell was willing. But his wife, who seemed on the verge of hysteria, could not bring herself to consent. " It looks like it's more than I can bear," she said, absently wiping away tears. " I don't know. I don't know. I've got to leave it to the Lord." At week's end, a group of Atlanta Masons arranged for Carolyn Joan to be flown to the famed Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., for further examination —Time (15: 1:51). " THE BEST THEY COULD " In Rochester, Minn., last week the unhappy parents of four-year-old Carolyn Joan Purcell found the " miracle " they were looking for. The little Georgia girl, threatened a fortnight ago (Time, Jan. 15) with the terrible alternatives of certain death or blindness by surgery, had been rushed to the famed Mayo Clinic by Atlanta Shriners. The Mayo doctors had pushed waiting patients aside to consider Carolyn Joan's case, and, after a painstaking ten-hour examination, had pronounced their verdict: Carolyn Joan was free of cancer, needed no operation. " It was the hand of God moving to stay the hand of the surgeon," said Carolyn Joan's mother. Back home, some of the Purcell's joy gave way to bitterness: " Why did the

doctors let me believe they had to take my child's eyes out? " The answer: the doctors themselves believed it. It is often impossible to tell the difference between certain inflammatory conditions and cancer of the eyes without removing the eye for microscopic examination. If there is any possibility of cancer, most doctors would rather sacrifice one eye than risk the patient's life by waiting. The Georgia specialist who was first called in by Carolyn Joan's family doctor was convinced that cancer was present. When the Purcell's refused to let him remove one of her eyes, he took her case to the staff specialists at Atlanta's Grady Memorial Hospital. Their conclusion was that immediate operation was vital. Hearing of Carolyn Joan's planned trip to Rochester, Grady's chief eye surgeon wrote to Mayo: " Some of us feel that the right eye should be sacrificed to make a proper diagnosis." Mayo apparently felt that the sacrifice was unnecessary. " Carolyn Joan has an inflammatory condition within each eyeball," they announced after studying her case. " It is not necessary to remove either eye for this disease." " I guess," said father Frank Purcell after his first good night's sleep in three weeks, " those Grady doctors did the best they could."—Time (22: 1:51).

" HAD THE MOTHER BEEN AS GULLIBLE " " The rarity with which the press exposes a medical blunder makes these cuttings worthy of note. " It is rather horrifying to reflect that had the mother been as gullible as the father the child's eyes would by now have been removed, and the specialists would be claiming another life-saving miracle of surgery! " Note the typical way in which, after their diagnosis had been discredited, they back-tracked to the excuse that it is sometimes necessary to ' sacrifice one eye ' (originally both were to come out). Presumably this explanation makes their frightfulness only half as bad! "—D.G., Manchester. That reader went below surface appearances to uncover the fundamental fallacy behind surgical and medical successes with cancer " in its early stages." So long as the effects of these treatments can be summed up in such simple terms as those used by my correspondent, it is possible that our present civilisation may yet make a reasonably good recovery. To cut away a tumour which has resulted from not only years but sometimes from generations of wrong living, is decidedly not a " cure."

All too often such procedures render genuine recovery impossible. GREAT " ADVANCES " IRRETRIEVABLY LOST I imagine that but for the mother's unreasonableness, we would by now be reading the usual enthusiastic commentaries in the medical press, lauding the bravery, indeed the heroism of the surgeon involved. Gradually he would have become an international figure. Within a year or two he would have been lecturing to medical audiences in Los Angeles, New York, London, Paris, Melbourne and Auckland, and doubtless a special gold medal would have been struck for him as The Surgical Genius of the Twentieth Century. Unfortunately for all concerned—except the little patient and the parents—that unreasonable mother not only refused to participate but, aided and abetted by the Mayo Clinic practitioners, she has probably destroyed all possibility of the enucleation of eyes ever becoming the fashionable craze of our time. Nothing is too daft for some people. As we have seen, even the comparatively slight violence introduced by taking a sample for investigation can initiate malignancy. Although the section taken from the suspected tumour may prove to be completely negative, it is quite usual for a benign tumour, after such interference to change into a typical cancer. Just a few weeks or months later it flares up suddenly and goes completely out of hand. Surely that fairly common finding should provide grave doubts about all surgical claims to success in such conditions? How could any surgeon have been called earlier? Here, as in most cases he is just as early as is the fire-raiser to the conflagration. Need I say that such occurrences receive no notice in the popular press? The rule is that only the relatives of the patient are left with any knowledge of the facts. It is a sad fact that not one person in a thousand uses his lifesaving critical powers to comprehend the terrible truth exposed in such incidents. Press and pulpit are united to uphold what Dr. Tilden called " the greatest racket the world has ever known."

FOOD AND DRINK: PLUS I cannot understand why you found it necessary to correct Mr Pearmain. Would it not be true to say that if the foods eaten are right all the evils that grow out of malnutrition would disappear? In these conditions, what could a Nature Cure practitioner do that would not be equally well done with a balanced diet?—P.S., Paisley. Human nutrition comprises vastly more than the mere eating and drinking of foodstuffs. Some time ago I had an interview with an educated young woman, suffering from a well-established digestive trouble. She wished me to outline a diet which would restore her to a more stable state of health. Questioning failed to bring out any major imbalance in dietetic habits sufficient to account for her rather disturbed state. There was a general nervous tension which caused me to question her other habits and routines. Here I met an unexpected resistance; obviously, if unconsciously, she did not feel comfortable about the nature of her work. In the end rather unwillingly she admitted that she was an Inspector for the Ministry of Food: in short, a snooper! She travelled around towns and villages coaxing butchers, provision merchants and such people into supplying her with items of food beyond the permitted ration. Having succeeded, she had to charge them with committing an offence and then carry through the prosecutions on behalf of the Ministry. It had been since taking up this work that the deterioration in her health had developed until for some months she had been finding it difficult to keep up with her duties. As the woman's build and general comportment indicated a relatively sensitive make-up I put it to her that she should give up that kind of work, but I found the suggestion was not at all acceptable. She explained that she could imagine no other job which would provide her with a comparable salary, quite apart from the great interest and excitement which were the concomitants of the job. What she required me to do was to restore her health without interfering in any way with these peculiar activities which combined both work and pleasure. UNSAVOURY EMPLOYMENT Now that situation had complexities of an unusual nature, but there is no need to go into any detailed assessment. The simple facts

are enough. Obviously from the effects upon her health she was not obtaining her own full approval and, as adviser, my own situation was not a happy one. Had I aided and abetted, I would have been accepting at least a slice of the responsibility for what was not altogether above-board and savoury in her employment. It would have been no satisfactory solution had I merely arranged to share her bouts of dyspepsia. The point I would stress here is that we cannot ignore the ethical side of good nutrition: " man does not live by bread alone." For the best metabolic results, not only should the nourishment we obtain come from honest food; the food itself should be honestly come by, and all the activities indulged in to that end should likewise be beyond the possibility of raising serious inward questionings. That ideal is by no means readily attainable by many people at the present time. From governmental to workshop level, regimentation can and does produce enormous problems for the mass of our people. For the majority, various " health " and food regulations by themselves constitute a definite health hazard. GOVERNMENTALLY IMPOSED STRESSES Complete self approval in these circumstances is by no means easy of attainment. For example, in many instances farmers or horticulturalists have studied food reform, and from that knowledge they have attempted to grow and market honest foods. All such are almost certain under government regulations to be branded as incompetents! Accordingly, any honest efforts they make on behalf of their customers must be done by stealth, otherwise the least they could anticipate would be eviction from their farms or market gardens. For citizens in such a situation, the simple solution would appear to be to give up all the accumulated wisdom relating to their work and go out for simple obedience to the numerous rules and regulations designed to foster biological ignorance. But that kind of self-debasement could readily lead to serious ill health. It could mean out of the frying pan into the fire with a vengeance. WATERY OVERWEIGHT So much for one type of psychological difficulty, but mistaken physiology can have even more direct effects upon bodily health.

Consider the widespread superstition that health and weight are exactly correlated: in other words the common belief, fostered by the drug profession, that if a person is putting on weight he must inevitably be getting healthier. Out of that acceptance all kinds of fantastic stupidities are built up. Take, for example, the idea that fattening the sick man can cure his tuberculosis. In reality the easiest way to put on weight is to prevent bodily acids from being thrown out. In order to keep the person alive under such circumstances the body holds on to considerable quantities of water to go along with the retained acids. In this way the acids become diluted so that life may be maintained, but far from being more healthy, if such a person lives, he does so under increasing likelihood of vital breakdown from increasing acidosis. One would have thought that such an obvious fact would by now have been realised by the whole medical body, but not one per cent. of the profession has even an inkling of that simple truth. On all sides we find it either stated in black and white, or at least implied, that an increase in weight indicates a gain in health. THE HALF-LIVING It is the typical heavy drinker—beer, coffee, tea or water—who becomes so waterlogged that everything is a burden. Just such a man the American mortician (undertaker to you) must have had in mind when he advertised: " Why walk about half-dead? We can bury you for $50." FROM INVALIDISM TO HIGH-LEVEL HEALTH Why do you claim that " the whole medical idea of cure is superstition " ? If the symptoms of serious heart disease, which are worrying a patient nearly silly, disappear and do not return, surely that would be a cure in every sense of the word, no matter how the result was obtained? If not, would you please be more explicit.— S.E., London. In one of his essays (The Human Scrap Heap), Alfred W. McCann wrote:— There is a peg in your shoe. It hurts your foot. It bruises and cuts the flesh. It sets up an irritation. You consult a doctor. He applies oils, lotions and germicides. He bandages the sore spot. You continue his treatment but complain that your foot will not heal.

All the serums, antitoxins, tonics and therapeutic agents of medical science will not heal it until some day it may occur to you to remove the peg. Nature will do her own healing . . . [as soon as] . . . the cause of her woe has been removed.

That is the basis of the Nature Cure approach to every possible kind of physical ailment. For any established Nature Cure adherent I had thought there could remain no doubt about what constitutes a genuine cure, nor any dubiety about what we mean by " symptom exchange " (generally called " cure " in medical circles). For example, by means of drugs or operations, many an invalid achieves relief from one set of symptoms at the expense of some new part or parts of the body manifesting more serious trouble. Freedom from heart symptoms could produce great relief because of the psychological implications, i.e., the panic which the thought of heart disease arouses in many people, but if the trouble is merely switched over to liver congestion or violent headaches, or the patient becomes crippled with rheumatism or some other debilitating set of symptoms, no cure should be claimed by any standards. CARE AND CURIOSITY Another difficulty is that so many doctors and their followers believe that it should be possible for a person, once cured, to remain cured without further effort. That, too, is fantastic nonsense. It is no more possible to achieve a permanent cure without further effort, than it is to take a " permanent " bath; one that will keep the person clean for the rest of his life without further ablutions. As has been emphasised in our various writings, genuine cure implies both sustained care and unremitting curiosity ; a healthy, living awareness of what is going on around and within oneself. The personal experiences that follow provide a pretty good illustration of what can be achieved with that kind of cure. Note that everything improves—vitality, awareness, concentration, determination and sheer joy of living: far more than a mere absence of one or two of many symptoms. " INCURABLE " HEART DISEASE I am now thirty-six years of age. From the time I was eighteen I was never really well. I suffered from severe rheumatism in hands, knees and feet, and also, for many years, from severe catarrh. I was rather breathless, always very

tired, and never, never had any energy to do things. I tried everything possible for catarrh for years. I had a perpetual tight band across my forehead and nothing I ever did for it improved it, although I had been to various doctors. One morning, at the age of 30, I collapsed completely after having run to catch a train. I could not breathe and was really very ill. The doctor who was called in said, " You must give up smoking," which was very funny because I had never smoked in my life! I was sent home by car and put to bed, and our local doctor, after various questions and examination, said I was seriously ill with bad valvular heart disease. " CONDEMNED TO DEATH " The doctor attended me for six months, during which time I just crawled around with the aid of a walking stick; short walks, very early to bed, drugs morning and night, resting in bed during the afternoon, and half a tumbler of tonic wine and a small glass of benedictine every night! This " careful " living went on for nearly a year, during which time I felt a wreck and was getting worse. My doctor told me that unless I gave up every form of activity I would live for only five years. He said that I would never ride again, must never run for a bus, never swim, never play tennis, in fact never do anything. Not satisfied with one doctor's advice I went to another, who in turn sent me to a specialist. He, too, gave me a serious verdict—" condemned to death " I called it. I also went to the Heart Hospital. I believed all they told me, and there followed another whole year of misery. I felt worse than I have ever felt in my whole life. Then one day I sent for a copy of The Heart, and was so impressed that I wrote to Mr Thomson for an appointment and finally went to see him. He said he thought I could be cured if I followed Nature Cure principles for two years. I started treatment at his clinic in Edinburgh. When I went there I was a wreck, and the day before I was due to leave I walked ten miles solidly after breakfast, arriving back at the clinic in time for lunch. " NEVER FELT FITTER " When I left I drove a car from Scotland to London, bringing with me another patient from the clinic, 417 miles in all, and we arrived in London at 6 p.m. the same evening. I never felt fitter in my whole life. I was feeling wonderful and still do. I continued rigidly with strict Nature Cure diet, cold baths, cold compresses (feet and waist) for two years. Then, on top of that, I started ice skating, and went regularly to the Richmond Ice Rink every day for nearly two years. I did very well indeed at figure skating and ice dancing. MEDALS GALORE I took up ballroom dancing, though I had never danced a step in my life. Just twelve weeks later I took the Bronze Medal Examination, passed highly commended. Encouraged by this initial success, I went on and took the Silver Medal, commended. Four months later I took the Gold Medal, highly

commended, and Bronze Double on the same day. (Bronze Double is Bronze Medal for dancing as a man). I took the Gold Cross, commended, which is the highest award open to an amateur dancer in that association. I passed my Associate Examination as a teacher, and then six months later I passed my examination as a Member (advanced teaching). What inspired me to work so very hard was that this was the supposedly last year of my life according to orthodox people. I did what I have been told has not been done before in dancing. I passed all examinations very well and in record time. I am now a teacher, fully qualified, and am employed by the London County Council as a teacher of dancing. All this was achieved in spite of the difficulties of the last two years of war —bombed and blasted at home three times, sleeping in shelters, improper feeding, not enough baths; in fact a really rotten life, unnatural in every way. I know myself I could never, never have gone through all that unless I had got so fit on Nature Cure. When I look back, I can hardly believe that it was really me. Was I really that sick, wretched thing only a few years ago? Now I am full of life and energy. I dance, skate, play tennis, ride, drive—in fact I do everything. Since I began this new life I have never looked back. L. S., London.

HEALTH IS PERSONAL That represents health with a plus sign. But no inkling of such genuine cures get into either the national or the local press! Why is the general public kept so woefully ignorant of each person's own responsibility for his good or poor health? The topical press gives full publicity to the tragedies; the sudden break-downs and deaths of citizens with heart disease, but not a word to such triumphs as above. Not unless some expensive new medicine can be announced as the miracle-working cause of the success. Another patient gives her experience of the Nature Cure treatment. Note again the all-round improvement:— VALVULAR DISEASE After reading other patients' testimony to Nature Cure I feel compelled to relate my own experience in the hope that it may revive hope in some one whose condition is as desperate as was my own. My ill-health dates back to the time (age three) when I had my tonsils removed, because my breathing was so difficult that my mother feared I would suffocate. There may have been some connection—apart from inherited catarrhal tendencies—in the fact that I was

weaned on starches. I grew up with constantly recurring head colds, ear-ache and spells of deafness. Almost always there was a catarrhal discharge and I believe I had almost every known childhood disease. I now realise those upsets were my body's efforts to get rid of its poisons, but in those days, like most people under medical care, my people were only interested in obtaining relief from my symptoms. EARLY INVALIDISM

At 10 years of age I was confined to bed and off school for months with what the doctor diagnosed as St. Vitus dance. After that experience my speech and memory were affected and I became very nervous and much given to fits of depression, so that lessons and exams, became an increasing ordeal. I left school at 16 to help mother in the farmhouse. My health improved somewhat over the next year or two, except for acne which for years made life a misery in spite of all kinds of ointments, etc., prescribed by the doctor. Then in my early twenties my heart began to behave very oddly, forcing me to rest. The new doctor, on hearing of St. Vitus dance, diagnosed a weak valve dating from that illness and advised more rest. After a time I improved and carried on working as before, but next began to suffer from increasing digestive trouble. For this I had to take stomach powders. Meanwhile I continued to suffer from constant nasal catarrh relieved with inhalants, douches, etc. At 26, when I got married, my doctor sent me to an Edinburgh hospital where I was thoroughly examined by X-ray, etc., and exhibited to medical students as an interesting subject. The report sent to my doctor stated that I had a serious heart complaint, involving two valves, and conception should be avoided, as chronic invalidism might result. From the nervous state I was in during the examination it is surprising that the report was not more alarming. NOTHING COULD BE DONE

As my husband was in the army I continued to help on the farm very quietly until after his discharge. Then we furnished one of the farm cottages and I tried to carry on helping with the farm and attend to my own house and husband as well. This additional work proved too much for me and I became very ill. My health gradually deteriorated and I became very breathless on exertion, so that I was reduced—apart from two hours sitting up during the day—to spend all my time in bed. Under this treatment my ankles swelled up, my nerves were in a terrible state, and the only thing which still seemed unimpaired was my appetite. The doctor's medicines only made me feel worse. My husband and family were much concerned about me, but on appealing to the doctor they were assured that nothing more could be done, as my kind of valvular disease was incurable. He also warned them that in a short time I would not be able to lie down to sleep, but would have to sit up all night. Naturally this news did not cheer me up much, and I was in despair, especially as I had to watch other people do my housework, etc., which grieved me very much. I felt I was a great burden to my husband and people, especially as they already had too much work to do on the farm. By this time I had become

thoroughly alarmed. I was sure I was going to die, and at night I felt so awful that I would wake up my husband, and of course the panic we built up between us did not improve matters. PERSONAL EFFORT BEGINS It was at this desperate stage that I sent for Mr Thomson's book on the heart. After reading it I began to experience a faint glimmer of hope, because he described how a patient with valvular disease of heart had been cured, so I wrote to the author giving particulars of my condition. An interview was arranged, and on examination the verdict was, with my co-operation, a satisfactory cure should be possible, but it would take two years. Although I was in a bad way and had catarrh all through my system, my stomach and heart disturbances had been built up from continuous wrong feeding and drugging since I was a child. I had a good body and should have been a physically vital and strong person. After thinking it over I decided I was prepared to do anything to get well, so I went to Kingston still rather doubtful. In just a few days I began to feel much better and soon I was walking about more than I had done for years. Thus encouraged I became enthusiastic and when I returned home after two months I felt very well. I had lost a lot of weight, as my food and liquid intake had been drastically reduced. As a result I had rather a struggle both with myself and my well-meaning family. They wanted to feed me up but despite their—and my own—doubts I felt that if I returned to my old habits all the benefits I had gained would be lost, so I kept on. That first winter I felt very miserable and sorry for myself. I continued to visit the clinic for advice and manipulation periodically and always came away cheered and encouraged by the kindly patience shown me with my various complaints, mostly due to my cravings for more starches. There was always a conflict going on inside me during the first year or two, trying to carry out what I knew was the right course on Kingston lines, and trying to keep my old bad habits at bay as well. After each visit I carried on with renewed enthusiasm always. HEALTH PLUS Now, at 36, after six years under nature cure guidance I look and feel a different person. I am told I look the picture of health and I am now full of vitality and happier than I have ever been before. I am making up for lost time and have taken up driving the car again, after a lapse of ten years, which proves how much my nerves have improved. I also play tennis and go for long walks daily and they have done wonders for me, though at first I was reluctant to do so, in spite of Mr Thomson's insistence. My present routine involves a full day in the fields regularly, doing the usual farm work, including planting, thinning, hoeing and harvesting. I also help in the farmhouse when necessary, and, of course, do all my own housework and am independent of any one else. I dig and look after our large garden. In fact, I feel I live a useful and happy life generally, and appreciate my return to health all the more, after so nearly losing it completely. The catarrhal discharge has entirely cleared up and my weight has risen from 7 stones to 9 stones, where it has remained steady for the past few

years. 1 no longer live in dread of what is going to go wrong next. As Mr Thomson asserts, once fear has been removed in heart patients, the benefits are remarkable, and in my case the subsequent peace of mind has helped immensely. My husband can verify that I am much easier to live with, and apart from several healing crises, I have hardly had a day off in the six years since I went to Kingston. Best of all my digestion gives me no trouble now ; I no longer crave for starches, I know when to stop eating, and my meals are really enjoyable and satisfying. My husband is now living on the same lines as myself which makes things much easier for me. I have proved beyond question that if any one in bad health has not tried Nature Cure on Kingston principles they should not consider their ailment as quite hopeless. Owing to my erratic education this testimony may fall short of the literary standard set by the other patients, but in any case I could never find words sufficient to express my gratitude to the practitioners and staff at Kingston. I know that but for them I would not be alive to record this tale.—A.P.

For any truth-seeker these are important statements, but such revelations are not welcomed in communities which are under the control of High Finance. COLONIC DIVERTICULITIS Can anything be done by Nature Cure for colonic diverticulitis? A friend who had an operation for this ten months ago Is still far from well, and the wound is still open (intentionally so for drainage purposes). As medical treatment has not helped me, although I have been in the doctor's hands for three years, I would make the switch to Nature Cure if you could give me reassurance.—W. P., Gorton. Colonic diverticulitis means a pouching or a ballooning-out of part of the bowel wall, usually somewhere around the sigmoid. It is essentially one of the conditions which develop within the body of a person who is not physically active and whose feeding and drinking habits are not in good balance. The business executive, who is kept hard at it during the day and who has much entertaining to do in the evenings, is the most common sufferer. Much can be done by Nature Cure methods if the person is prepared to readjust his whole technique of living—implying, of course, a collateral readjustment of his thinking. Perhaps the best answer to my questioner is to give a short case history of a patient who recently called in to report progress. This patient wrote us first in October 1951. His main question: " Is there a cure for colonic diverticulitis? " with the word " diverticulitis " in capital letters. His trouble had begun after his

business premises sustained bomb damage. Immediately thereafter he had suffered much physical disturbance, which had greatly increased since that time (1940). By 1945 he had begun to feel really ill, and his doctor diagnosed anaemia and gave liver injections with no benefit. A specialist was consulted, who found " No anaemia, all tests negative." Then, X-rayed, and diverticulitis in the colon discovered. When first seen at the Kingston Clinic, February 1952, he had just completed a prolonged course of medical treatment, including a " lacto-vegetarian diet and penicillin injections." When I remarked that such a combination probably created even more misery and intense flatulence than before, his enthusiastic reply was " You said it! You've hit it bang on! " When first examined he was markedly toxemic and acidic, with an enormous " raw-meat ", deeply-grooved tongue, and a deep anal fissure which was " leaking " and causing much distress. There was great tenderness in the inguinal area, and marked 'ptosis, with remarkably poor muscular tone, together with considerable discomfort and itching down the left thigh and around the anus. For some time previously there had been also a constant ache in the right foot. Blood pressure was high, and there was a rather nervous heart condition. He was a typically highly-strung person, with long, narrow, deeply-grooved nails, and for some weeks had been suffering much palpitation and nausea after meals. His general condition could be described as flabby and watery, and his weight, 11 st. 12 lbs., was far below what would have been anticipated had his flesh been reasonably firm. As a result he had ample bulk for a weight of well over 13st. An added complication was the exceedingly large number of massive amalgam fillings in his teeth, with an occasional gold filling here and there. THE DOCTOR TOO Residential treatment began in March 1952. Following my instructions given earlier he had been much easier; especially the flatulence had cleared up since coffee and penicillin had been cut out on my advice. " You know it's all been a bit difficult because my doctor is a friend of the family, and he too suffers from diverticulitis." Five weeks after commencing residential treatment he had a vigorous cleaning-up crisis, during which many old troubles from

years gone by came back for a farewell visit. For three days and nights he had been completely miserable with a violent cold and head pains. Even so, he announced on leaving a few days later that he was delighted with what had happened! His wife too was tremendously elated; it was years since she had seen him so alert and vigorous. CRISES INTERVENE When next seen, a month later, the patient admitted that he had vastly more energy and could do better and much more work. His weight had come down to 10st. 4lbs., and his corporation had reduced markedly—altogether a much more presentable and likeable individual, with his blood pressure down to that of a twenty-year-old. In October 1952 he was back for a further ten day spell of treatment, and because Everything had again stirred up, various miseries and pains returned. Unfortunately the treatment of this crisis had to be cut short, and after returning home he rang to announce that although he was able to keep up his work " flatulence and constipation are as bad as ever." The doctor friend had called in and " advised me not to take enemas." I recommended that he should not worry about the doctor's opinion, although in this particular case I was in full agreement with what had been advised. On our advice he underwent a two-day fast, followed by a cutting down of quantities of all foodstuffs. " TWENTY YEARS YOUNGER " Unfortunately at that stage, as is, so common, this man was still being greatly influenced by medical ideas, pushed at him by laymen and doctors alike—(they falsely judge health by the bulk of the person). Accordingly I think he had again begun to increase his food intake rather too much in the effort to get back to his former bulgy state. A week later, however, he rang up to say that he had carefully followed instructions, and used these words: " I feel remarkably well in spite of it all "—revealing phrase! When he reported last week his statement was that for the first time in fifteen years he had not missed one day from the office through illness, and was feeling very fit indeed. The tendency is still rather toward overfeeding. However, as his blood pressure remains excellent and he is taking much more exercise, this is no longer the critical factor it was earlier. One amusing complication he reports arises because he has not confided in his doctor friend what he has been doing. After a year on

Nature Cure the doctor had remarked, just before I saw him, " I can't think how you are getting on so well; my diverticulitis is getting steadily worse—and dammit, you look twenty years younger! " SUCCESS On my advice he is now screwing up his courage to tell the doctor all about how it was done. I imagine there may be a more receptive attitude on the doctor's part because, according to my informant, the local hospital has begun to score great successes with operations for hernia. After the operation the patient is put on a week's fast, followed by one week on uncooked fruit and vegetables only. They report 100 per cent. success! That certainly is getting much nearer the correct handling of such conditions. The improvement I would suggest would be discontinuance of antibiotics and a preparatory three weeks dieting prior to the operation. (Better still it would be to begin to eat in a balanced way and take plenty of outdoor exercise thirty years earlier. There would then be no need for such an operation). But it is good to know that in at least one area sanity is breaking through. That short case history appeared in the April 1953 issue of Rude Health and as a result we received the following additional information from the patient: " Your Colonic Diverticulitis article is particularly interesting to me as it is obviously my case. " I missed giving you a somewhat gruesome conversation between myself and my doctor friend a few weeks before I first came to see you. We were commiserating together on our common complaint, actually ' enjoying bad health ' which people do, when he passed the professional opinion that the only satisfactory and indeed inevitable cure was to have the whole of the lower bowel removed, an opening made in the side and a box receptacle fitted. He thought we might as well make up our minds and go together to London and get it done. " I made up my mind immediately and travelled north. He is still staggering around looking as though he has booked a single ticket for Hades, and that is what your correspondent ' W.P.' will do, minus bowels, if he doesn't make his mind up quickly and get to Kingston.

" Re your observations on post operational treatment for Hernia, in our local hospital. To be exact this should be:—One week on water only, second week on milk and water. After that the ' fast ' is broken with one potato to breakfast, second meal as follows—ice cream, sliced tomatoes, grated cheese and macaroni all together, and then they are sent home—kicked out into the world wondering, because they feel so fit, but with no idea of why. I know personally two men who have had this operation and treatment, one over seventy, and the other over eighty, both fit and doing heavy physical work. " One final interesting item: in neither of these men was penicillin used after the operation. I do not know whether this is true in all the cases, but possibly revolutionary changes are taking place." To clarify another aspect of nutrition (and of colonic diverticulitis) I select the following matter from another issue of Rude Health: WE STAND CORRECTED—OR DO WE? In reading " Constipation and our Civilisation " I have been confused through two passages which appear (to me) to contradict each other : One on p. 222—"Such a person may be eating a goodsized salad every day, following the usual suggestions on Nature Cure diet, but even despite thorough chewing the bowel may be unable to make use of more than an insignificant proportion of the valuable salts and vital elements." The other, on p. 227, ". . . the health-seeker can still build up his own internal culture in smaller instalments, by eating green leafy vegetables and other plant foods which have neither been sprayed with poisons nor too-carefully washed before consumption." It appears to me that—reading in with the context—the one statement cancels out the other, and until I can get my mind clear I can't seem to progress in my studies, so if you could possibly help me I would be grateful. This letter was given to our first-year students and I accept the following three answers as covering the essential points sufficiently. Jocelyn Fraser—The important thing to remember is that raw vegetables are the most difficult of all foods for civilised humans to digest. Over centuries of wrong living our digestive apparatus has

become weakened and cannot deal adequately with large quantities of such food. The first paragraph which you quote is referring to people who eat too much—and probably too frequently—so that the food is rushed through the intestine before the digestive juices, and what bacteria there may be, have had time to break down even a very small proportion of the vegetable matter. Also, if there is too much bulk the food near the walls of the intestines may get digested but that in the middle tends to pass through unchanged, as the digestive juices have not penetrated that far. Another point to remember is that a large quantity of food stretches the walls of the intestine, thus making them thinner and more permeable. Any food eaten with the salad, bread and so on, tends to be digested and absorbed first, leaving the more important, not so easily released mineral salts and vitamins till the end, and, if there is enough of the other foods, the essential salts and vitamins may be left almost completely untouched. The food is not meant to be rushed through the intestine so fast that it cannot be digested and assimilated. The large intestine is composed of numerous sacculations—pockets—which retard the forward movement of the food, but their efficiency is reduced when the intestine is distended with too much food. If you eat a small quantity of food it is retained for a considerable time while the enzymes and bacteria break down the cellulose walls, so releasing the organised salts and other nutrients. Less food is eaten but more is made available to the body in the long run. The important thing the second paragraph contains is a warning: " eat plant foods which have neither been sprayed with poisons nor too carefully washed before consumption." Plants grown out of doors are covered with benign bacteria from the air in rich deposits of intestinal bacteria which have come from the excrement of birds and flies, which are killed by poisonous sprays and so lost to the digestive tract of the animal who eats them—quite apart from the more direct, undesirable effects which such sprays have on the plants and their consumers. Washing too carefully also removes the bacteria so that the desired effect is unobtained. A good " once-over " is quite sufficient to remove the surface dirt and will not remove too many bacteria as there are plenty of crevices in which they can lodge. So, you can build up a stock of bacteria, although not so quickly, without sour milk, by eating good wholesome, raw vegetables,

provided you eat slowly and chew well and don't eat too often. Remember also to restrict yourself to small helpings. James Johnson:—Looked at from a Nature Cure point of view, the two paragraphs from Constipation and our Civilisation do not contradict each other. To begin with the first paragraph (p. 222)—Here is a human intestine more or less sterile due to prolonged eating of processed foods. As a result it has lost its ability to digest and assimilate raw green vegetables, which contain so many valuable salts and other vital elements. To regain this ability we must rebuild the concentrations of helpful bacteria; an essential for a healthy digestion. This can be done in two ways:— (a) By sipping specially soured milk which introduces the required bacillus as a culture, or (b) By eating green leafy vegetable and other plant foods which have neither been sprayed with poisons, nor too carefully washed before consumption. In this way, the necessary internal colonies could be built up in smaller instalments. However it must be noted that in order to make use of the green leafy vegetables they must not be eaten with too much—or with too many different varieties of—starchy foods (all of which are easier to digest) since the body will satisfy itself from the easily digested starches and make little effort to use the green vegetables, or leave them untouched. In that way many people fail to utilise the valuable salts and vital elements contained in greenstuffs. Read the disputed two paragraphs again with these points in mind, and I hope you will agree that they reinforce each other. Janet Hislop . . . The aim in building up colonies of lactic acid bacteria in the bowel is to enable the host to gain access to the more important nutrients in the food. With too few bacteria and with the bulk of the food always excessive, everything is pushed along so fast that it is out of the digestive tract again before it has any chance of being acted upon by any bacteria that do happen to survive. So neither good

digestion nor good symbiosis are present, and the unhappy dyspeptic's assimilation goes from bad to worse. It is not only when lots of other food is eaten that the salad part of the meal is liable to be left unused. Even an over-large salad, eaten by itself or with otherwise well-balanced accompaniments, could pro-duce the same result. When a person over-eats, all the food tends to be pushed along too fast, so that there is no time for proper digestion and " hidden hunger " appears. To increase the size of the meals to meet the resultant hunger is to destroy all possibility of maintaining good nutrition. What then happens as a final result is that the proportion of highly desirable vitamins and mineral salts absorbed is actually reduced. Not only is the excess food wasted, but, because of its presence and its bulk, the vital elements which make for health do not become assimilated and incorporated into the bodily tissues. That is why quantities should always be kept small. " He who would eat much must eat little, for by eating less he will live longer and so be able to eat more."—Louis Carnaro (Sure Methods of Attaining a Long and Healthful Life, Padua, 1558). There is also the complication that most civilised people have come from generations of forebears accustomed to cooked, processed and too-easily-available predigested foods. So in this respect their digestive tracts have atrophied. The tendency is always that the more we do for any organ the less it becomes able to do for itself. Our organs, too, take the line of least resistance. FOOD REFORM PLUS PENICILLIN: IT DOES NOT WORK. In reading through your article on Diverticulitis (found a few pages previously in this book) I am completely baffled by the statement that a lacto-vegetarian diet should cause intense flatulence. Surely the diet at Kingston is what the average food reformer would call lacto-vegetarian? In my own case (over 5 years) lacto-vegetarianism on Kingston lines has caused neither misery nor flatulence.—R.E., Penrith. There is a degree of misunderstanding implicit in this question. Before attempting any explanation let us look at the baffling statement in its original form:—

" When first seen . . . he had just completed a prolonged course of medical treatment, including, ' a lacto-vegetarian diet and penicillin injections.' When I remarked that such a combination probably created even more misery and intense flatulence than before, his enthusiastic reply was ' You said it! You've hit it bang on! ' "

In this instance my questioner has completely missed the overwhelmingly complicated situation introduced by penicillin within the gut of an invalid already suffering from prolonged and severe digestive trouble. I take it that for most readers there is no need to emphasise the fundamental difference between a straight lacto-vegetarian regime and the same thing "fortified " with penicillin. As we have seen in the foregoing answers,* an essential ingredient in the gut of any frugivore or herbivore (fruit or vegetable eating animal) is the symbiotic helpers, the lactic acid bacilli. Their principal function would appear to be to break down the cellulose structures of vegetables; the essential preliminary step toward the digestion and assimilation of uncooked vegetable matter—the " difficult food " for most dyspeptics. Increased flatulence and distress would appear to be inevitable from the fact that the man was already an invalid of many years' standing, with his principal trouble concentrated in the bowel. In any long-ailing townsman, the digestive tract is almost certain to be a major battle-ground. In it the benign symbiotic bacteria are present only in meagre quantity, or completely absent. As a result the walls of the gut are kept in a state of constant and agitated effort to prevent the absorption of decaying pabulum. A large part of the problem presented to the Nature Cure practitioner in such a case is how to culture healthful and helpful bacteria within the sick bowel while encouraging the patient to adopt habits which would tend to reduce the factors favouring their putrefactive cousins. These long-established vigorous colonies of putrefactive bacteria not only create new problems of toxemia, but by their activities break down and otherwise prevent the absorption of some of the more subtle food factors: i.e., while still sound and complete.

*And more fully developed in Two Health Problems: Constipation and Our Civilisation.

On the face of it, the introduction of any general bacteriadestroying material, e.g., penicillin, in any concentration which can be tolerated by the patient, is unlikely to do much harm to the longestablished colonies of putrefactive bacteria, but is almost certain to wipe out any traces of the lactic and other benign bacteria which may still exist. As a result, the gases from decaying matter within the bowel are almost certain to be greatly increased. The main function of penicillin, as used by the medical profession, is to destroy bacterial life. But penicillin has no intelligence. It does not select the type of germ it is to destroy. That is a governing fact in our investigation. In as few words as possible, let me summarise thus:— (1) The lactic acid bacilli of the bowel are readily killed off even in a healthy person by many of the commonly used drugs, not primarily intended as germ-killers. (2) It may be well to quote here Dr. J. H. Tilden's commonsense estimate: " There are at least a thousand friendly germs for every even remotely damaging one—until we begin to attack them." From that point onward, he explains, no animal or germ is likely to remain friendly toward an individual who constantly tries to kill it! The unfriendly germs of to-day are probably the friendly ones we were attacking yesterday in every possible way and at every opportunity. Even the completely symbiotic bacteria are liable to turn against us when we attack and attempt to destroy them. (3) On that basis the penicillin route leads to highly complex situations within the digestive tract. Not only are our symbiotic allies prevented from helping us: under steady attack they probably become hurtful to their inimical host instead of remaining cooperative or at least passive. (4) Even for a young and vigorous person, not in the habit of eating uncooked vegetables, there is usually a difficult transition phase before the essential colonies of symbiotic germs become established to deal with the cellulose framework of the vegetables. Meanwhile the enervated gut itself has to be trained to make some use of the new pabulum—to say nothing of doing so efficiently. (5) The tremendous separate complications arising out of the difficulties outlined in the foregoing paragraphs simply build up into

insoluble incompatibles when more vegetable matter is introduced into (A) a penicillin saturated bowel of (B) a previously nonvegetable-eater who (C) is already a well-established invalid with bowel trouble. (6) Each new batch of inefficiently-dealt-with vegetable matter added to the already insufficiently-controlled and putrefying mass must inevitably mean increasing distress and discomfort for the patient. On the face of it the concentration of penicillin cannot have reached a point where all life has been cut off within the bowel, otherwise degeneration of that organ would set in and the patient would die. (7) As the patient was still alive—though only just—when first seen by me, the history he gave suggested a long-drawn-out state of misery and great discomfort within the large bowel. That I think is why when I made the suggestion of flatulence and misery, it was forthwith confirmed by his enthusiastic agreement. Apparently none of his previous practitioners had seen any connection between the treatment he was receiving and his increasing misery. Another instance of iatrogenic disease ! ILL FARES THE LAND. In the issue of Normal Agriculture for February 1953 Dr. Joe D. Nichols, Physician, farmer and banker of Atlanta, Texas, gives a family history which is educational and revealing in the extreme. After accepting the emotional causes of disease he gives the second great cause of physical breakdown as nutritional, and tells of his own great, great grandfather who farmed 2,000 acres of rich South Carolina land, growing cotton and tobacco, prospering apace, and raising and educating a large family. When this family grew up they found that the farm was no longer growing good crops and no longer making money. So his great grandfather moved to Tennessee and took over a large and fertile farm. There he did precisely what his father had done before him. He worked hard, built a large house, made lots of money, raised and educated a large family. History was repeated. When his son had grown to manhood the farm was no longer making a living for the family.

SOIL & HEALTH—DISEASE PAYS DIVIDENDS The grandfather then moved to Alabama and took over 2,000 acres of good land and repeated the experiences of his father and grandfather. Dr. Nichols' own father was the baby of a family of twelve. By the time he had grown to manhood the farm had been mined out, so he, the father, bought a rich farm in Arkansas, and the same round started all over again. Dr. Nichols continues:— But by the time I was grown, all the profit from the farm was going to pay for fertilizer and poison spray. So I had to move, but there was no place left for me to go. By this time the whole country had been settled and most of the land exploited. So I decided to study medicine. I graduated from the University of Arkansas with an M.D. degree in June 1932. In November 1933 I started practicing medicine in Atlanta, Cass County, Texas. This was in the depths of the great depression, and Cass County was one of the poorest places in Texas. The average production of corn was 8 bushels per acre. In six months I was making more money than the president of the bank who had been there a lifetime. You see all the land was poor and all the people were sick ! I did not average fifty cents per office call nor more than one dollar for house calls, but I had volume.

There we have in a remarkably concise form a microcosm of civilised society of our day. In all countries where farming has been " modernised " mining of the land has become compulsory. But this rake's progress is not inevitable. Let Dr. Nichols give his own experience:— Now I have a farm. I bought one thousand acres of the poorest land in America. Most of it only cost ten dollars an acre. It was as hard as concrete and would hardly grow weeds when I got it. My ambition is to restore the fertility to this worn out land. I believe I can make this farm worth a hundred thousand dollars and the expense of doing it is a legitimate deduction from income tax. This is the only way that I can create an estate for my own old age and for my boys. I believe that a hundred years from now there will be a Nichols living in my brick house.

" EVERYBODY IS SICK " Dr. Nichols makes some searching observations in relation to medicine and present disease mania: It is true that great advances have been made in certain branches of medicine. But despite all this, everybody in the country is sick. I do not know any one anywhere who does not have some physical disability. My own son at the age of three had three bad teeth! It is hard to find a child in school anywhere without dental caries. Last year we had more cancer than ever before. We had more heart disease. It is the leading cause of death, killing young people before the age of forty all over the land. We had more high blood pressure, more stomach ulcers, more rheumatism, more diabetes, and more mental disease.

Dr. Nichols' next observation deserves serious consideration. He points out that 50 per cent, of hospital beds in America are occupied by mental patients. He uses this phrase: " They are running out the top windows all over the land, and more mental hospitals are being built every day." U.S.A. 50% vs. G.B. 42% The problem of mental breakdown is greater in U.S.A. than it is in Great Britain, but we are not far behind:— 8,000 MENTAL CASES: WAITING LIST FOR BEDS The Minister of Health, Mr Iain Macleod, said in London yesterday that he regarded the problem of mental health as the gravest that faced his Ministry. With 42 per cent, of the hospital beds devoted to patients suffering from mental illness, the gravity of the problem was not generally realised. " There is a waiting list for beds of some 8,000 people, of whom half are children . . . Mr Macleod, who was opening the conference of the National Association for Mental Health, said it was a tragedy that in the more care-free days that more money was not allotted to the mental health field.—News Chronicle (6:2:53).

My only commentary is that this problem of mental health is grave not only for the Ministry: it menaces all that is best in our civilisation. " PERHAPS WE ARE NOT SO SMART AFTER ALL " Dr. Nichols surmises, after going on to notice the increasing growth of polio: " Perhaps we are not so smart after all. Maybe something is wrong . . . " Poor land grows poor food that makes poor people, who are sick. Poor land grows food that is poor in vitamins, poor in minerals, poor in enzymes and proteins of poor quality. " All this means sick people."

PHYSIOLOGY, PSYCHOLOGY AND POTATO PEELINGS A reader of Rude Health sent the following cutting with a statement that it should interest Nature Cure adherents: Spud-bashing has its compensations for the good folk of Aberfoyle, Perthshire. Major A. D. Cameron, of the Bailie Nicol Jarvie Hotel, noted Aberfoyle hostelry, gave the reason yesterday.

He told the Scottish division of the British Hotels and Restaurants Association at Peebles that the caterers for the Rob Roy film unit, who have to look after several hundred " extras," dump bags of potatoes at cottages, saying: " If you like to peel these we will give £2 a bag." And peeled they are. —News Chronicle (22:4:53).

For those in a position to avail themselves of such opportunities it is certainly interesting. Not only is the work well paid for in a financial sense, but biologically it opens up opportunities which may be deduced from an Editorial in Vigil of New Delhi: " IS THIS NOT CRAZY ? " It is reported that Dr. Robert R. Williams the scientist to whose credit goes the synthesising of vitamin B1, has discovered a method of adding such nutrient elements to polished rice as will fortify those for whom it is the main food. First, according to his invention, the polished rice grains are to be sprayed with selected vitamins and minerals, and then the grains are to be coated with a thin layer of an edible substance which, so to speak, will imprison the vitamins and minerals. No doubt . . . Dr. Williams' invention would involve considerable expenditure. Presumably, the necessary machinery would have to be bought from America and highly skilled scientists and experts would be needed to take charge of the process. However, Dr. Williams estimates that the cost would not be prohibitive even tor Asian peoples. What I have just written is stark unadorned fact. It is not a satire on modern fads. It is not an anti-American burlesque. Rice is one of the most complete and nourishing foods known to man. And what do we do with it? We scrape off most of its nutrient elements and then we are invited to set up factories to put back again a synthetic imitation of what we have scraped off and thrown away. Of course, it is admittedly not easy to define madness; perhaps this is sanity! The ordinary English housewife buys bread that has been whitened by agene and may never see the reports of scientists who have found agene an excellent rat-bane. All these atrocities against the health of her family are perpetrated by the manufacturers with the connivance of the State and she is practically defenceless against them. In India a housewife buys good, nutritious rice and takes it to be polished, to get the nutrition rubbed off. Little wonder, then, that the mills thrive and despite Gandhi's protests, hand-pounding is dying out. The government can spend a few lakhs on American machinery and engage a few foreign experts, and Dr. Williams will show us how to put back on rice a synthetic imitation of the goodness we have thrown away. Let us hope that at least a sense of humour will deter any Indian government from such a step.

GRENFELL OF LABRADOR Here is a bit of history to point the moral of that Editorial. On his last visit to Edinburgh we were privileged to have an interview with

Sir Wilfred Grenfell, who told us of an emergency call he had to make in Labrador to a family who had been stricken with scurvy. They presented him with quite a problem and a remarkable paradox. He found this family living in a segregated area, with the parents and the elder son bedridden, while the two younger children were running round vigorously and showing no signs of ill-health whatsoever. Apart from many layers of dirt, they were thoroughly wholesome looking youngsters. Yet, despite the fact that scurvy is essentially a dietetic deficiency disease, all of the family were apparently living on exactly the same food. To solve the problem Sir Wilfred made an experiment. He asked the mother to prepare the one meal they had each day and have the whole family eat it just as if he were not present. The poor mother was not in a good state but she followed her usual routine; pulling herself out of bed, she made a fire and put a pot of potatoes on to boil. The potatoes were in their jackets and this constituted the only food the family had been eating for some time, except for some salt fish and an egg or two from a few chickens kept adjacent to the living room. (These chickens, Sir Wilfred was interested to note, were quite healthy, although their sole food too, had been derived from potatoes). When the meal was ready the pot was placed on the table, and after a helping had been carried to each of the two bedridden patients, the mother and the two children sat down and began to eat. A VITAL FACTOR Sir Wilfred was interested to note that the elder son and the parents ate the potatoes after peeling off the skins with their fingers— the skins being thrown on the floor. The sole food of the grown-ups thus consisted of the insides of the potatoes only. It was altogether otherwise with the two younger children. They gobbled up their share of the potatoes in great haste. Then they got down on the floor and began eating as many of the discarded skins as they could manage to collect before the mother swept the residue through a small hatch in the wall into the hen-house at the back. Grenfell was careful to emphasise that the sole difference between what the younger children were eating, and what was consumed by the parents and their elder brother consisted in that one,

apparently insignificant item—the peelings. They represented the difference between serious illness (which would have led straight to death) and almost perfect health. So the Aberfoyle crofters and villagers are presented with a tremendous bargain. All the worthwhile part of the food, brought to their doors, and after separation, left with them. Not only are they paid for cutting away the defective portion; to make assurance doubly sure, the useless and potentially dangerous part of the food is carted away so that nothing remains to menace them, their children and their livestock! SLOW SUICIDE It seems a pity that the caterers and the film " extras " have learned nothing from thousands of experiences and experiments carried out over the past 50 years. Despite our boasted, and indeed truly marvellous, applications of scientific discoveries in other fields, in face of the comparatively simple problem of feeding himself, Modern Man fails. He is in process of slowly but surely destroying himself. Let us look at one bygone but most dramatic demonstration. It occurred during the 1914-18 war, after the German raider—a converted cruiser—Kronprinz Wilhelm sailed into the U.S.A. Navy base at Newport News in April 1915. The ship's company were in serious trouble. Having left Hoboken on 3rd August 1914, she sailed the seas for 255 days, touching at no port but collecting water and food and fuel from the merchantmen she intercepted before she sank them. The result was that, as most people would see it, everybody on board had a choice of all the best of everything in the way of food and drink. For example, after looting one ship, La Correntina, en route from Argentina to London, the Kronprinz was so packed with provisions that she had " enough meat to give each member of her crew as much as three pounds a day for an entire year." In addition there were large stores of butter, white flour, tea-biscuits, potatoes and canned vegetables added to her already large supplies of ham, tea, coffee, oleo-margarine, champagne, sweet cakes, salt fish and other " essentials " and luxuries of any typical British or U.S.A. household. (On February 5th 1915, she sank the Samemtha loaded with whole wheat. None of it went to the cruiser).

And the outcome? By that time some of the crew were suffering from neuritis, especially in the legs, and swollen ankles, but nobody was seriously ill. Less than two months after sinking that cargo of " unpeeled " wheat which could have saved them, fifty of the crew were beginning to behave " queerly." They were irritable and quarrelsome, with sore gums, swollen legs and painful joints. But nobody guessed why, so when on March 25th, 1915, they sank another ship, the Colby carrying a cargo of whole wheat none of the precious, unprocessed wheat was saved. WHEN DEPRIVED OF PEELINGS By that time many of the crew were showing alarming symptoms: paralysis of limbs, shrivelling of muscles, dilated heart, anaemia, oedema and neuritis were common and fifty of the men had lost the power to stand up. As M'Cann describes it: " they were dropping at the rate of two a day. It seemed that a curse had descended upon the cruiser and it was plain that the whole crew was rapidly going to pieces." The Captain was forced to choose between what Alfred M'Cann calls a crew of " five hundred dead bodies in a few more weeks " or a dash for the nearest port. He chose Newport News and as a result flummoxed the U.S.A. Medical Authorities at that port, and gave M'Cann his chance to stage a perfect demonstration. It may be well to explain that M'Cann had been an avid follower of N.C. ideas for many years. He corresponded with Lindlahr and Tilden while doing work in collaboration with Dr. Harvey W. Wylie. Both he and Wylie were ardent enthusiasts for honest foodstuffs; so much so that both of them came under the fiercest of attacks from the powerful political bodies organised by the wealthy U.S.A. manufacturers of adulterated foods. " PROTECTION " In his book, A History of a Crime Against the Pure Food Law, published in 1929, Wylie told of how he was deposed from his post as first Head of the Federal Food and Drug Administration. Even President Theodore Roosevelt was used as a tool by the Mighty Food Adulterers. He appointed a Referee Board to " protect " the M.F.As. from prosecution by Wylie. Appointed as President of this Board was Dr. Ira Remsen, discoverer of, and owner of the royalties on, saccharine. One of the tasks put before Remsen's Board was to decide if saccharine could be used as a safe adulterant for foods.

Their decision was that saccharine could be used. Wylie goes on to tell of how various employees of the Food and Drug Administration lost their jobs for trying to carry out their duties. Dr. Royal Lee has drawn attention to the fact that Dr. Floyd Robison of the Administration was discharged for giving evidence that benzoate of soda was a harmful adulterant. Opposed to his testimony was the claim of the Remsen Board. Needless to say, they had found that benzoate of soda was entirely harmless. THE HARD WAY That is the background from which Alfred M'Cann arrived at his beliefs about the place of faked foodstuffs as a major cause of serious disease. As a food chemist, and from his knowledge of how government food inspectors had been ousted from their jobs through the political pull of the Food Adulterers, he was well aware that any honest attempt to resolve the problem posed by the pitiful state of the crew of the Kronprinz Wilhelm was almost certain to be bitterly opposed by respected persons in high places. How he outmanoeuvred the Port Medical Officials at Newport News is a fascinating story in itself. Suffice it to say that after five days, when they were at their wit's end and completely at a loss to suggest any cure for that unhappy crew, M'Cann came along and persuaded the ship's doctor to allow him to take over. What he told that pitifully worried and overwhelmed man I give in his own words: . . . The German cruiser lay at anchor in the James River, a floating wreck, a hospital ship, a lesson to the American experts who cry " beri-beri and polished rice," when red meat and white bread are the real issue. Their scientific murmurings only serve to further mislead the American people and cloud refined food in a maze of professional ignorance. Of course there really is a disease called beri-beri caused by polished rice, but there is no rice connection with the Kronprinz Wilhelm. . . . Here was a crew of men living in the open air, eating the staple articles of diet for which American scientists claim so much. Fresh meat, all the fat and cheese they could eat, boiled potatoes, canned vegetables, condensed milk, sugar, tons of fancy cakes, biscuits and white bread, and all the coffee and tea they could drink constituted their diet . . . Americans develop the same conditions, but because they eat many other offsetting foods, which were outside the reach of the German sailors, the severity of the condition is modified accordingly. On the Kronprinz Wilhelm there was no outside assistance in the form of offsetting fresh vegetables and fruits or whole grain foods to lessen that

intensity. The canned vegetables consumed, although theoretically contributing base-forming elements, were in comparatively small quantities. Their juices, contaminated to some extent with salts of tin and sheet iron, acted possibly as an irritant to the kidneys, already taxed beyond their capacity with excess quantities of sulphuric, phosphoric and amino acids, elaborated in the digestion of high protein and refined carbohydrate foods. Americans before the war, as far as they could afford, ate more or less generously of onions, lettuce, asparagus, cabbage, carrots, parsnips, cauliflower, brussels sprouts, celery, apples, berries, oranges, grapes and other base-forming foods, all of which assist Nature to combat or to modify some of the evil effects of the refined diet on which the Germans attempted to thrive for a long period. . . . The lesson of the Kronprinz Wilhelm is this: She has proved almost conclusively the inadequacies of the very foods on which America relies so heavily for the protection of her troops, as well as the protection of her so-called middle and lower class civilians. No prolonged experiments had even been conducted to determine the evil result of living exclusively on such foods. The Kronprinz Wilhelm furnished that experiment. There can be no greater or more picturesque proof of the folly of unbalancing food by refinement, of the folly of ignoring the meaning of the salts, colloids and vitamins natural to all unprocessed foods; of the folly of claiming for high caloric foods the absurd virtues they do not possess. . . . It was certain that if removed from the German cruiser to a hospital and subjected to the conventional hospital treatment, including tea, white toast, white bread, butter, cornstarch pudding, farina, cream of wheat, mashed potatoes and chops, all of the victims of the Kronprinz Wilhelm would have been doomed to tuberculosis, if tuberculosis had not already taken residence in their tissues. Their only hope of complete restoration to health, which meant complete repair of all the damage already done, and a return of nutritional immunity against disease, lay in a prolonged diet of food containing an excess of baseforming elements and a deficiency of acid-forming elements. . . . With Dr. Perrenon, the ship's surgeon, I went over all these points, and many more, treating them in detail. I did not suggest to him that it was beri-beri which had so tragically affected his men, for the reason that the cure for beri-beri, pellagra, acidosis, nephritis, edema and scurvy is the same. It consists in restoring by unrefined foods to the sapped body the bases stolen from it. Dr. Perrenon asked me to write a formula for feeding his stricken men. I did so, left him an article I had written on the subject and returned to New York . . .

" THE BEST OF FOOD " By the ship's cook and the chief surgeon he was told just how each meal was made up prior to the outbreak of the " beri-beri ": in which

110 of the crew of 500 collapsed. So he learned what was bringing down the men at a rate which promised that the entire crew would be invalids or dead in two more weeks. He already knew what to do for the beri-beri, acidosis, nephritis, jail oedema, trench oedema, war nephritis, toxemia, pellagra, or whatever other name may be adopted to describe the sufferings of the men. Here is what he discovered: For breakfast they had been having a choice of cheese/oatmeal, sausage, corned beef, fried potatoes, smoked ham, boiled rice, fried beef, or beef stew; with white bread and butter or oleomargarine, coffee, condensed milk and sugar. For dinner they had a choice of soups, roast beef, fried steak, pot roast, salt fish, with canned vegetables served in the juice that stood in the cans, boiled potatoes, white bread and butter or oleomargarine, coffee, condensed milk and sugar. For 'tea' at four o'clock they were served with a plate of English fancy biscuits or sweet cakes with coffee, condensed milk and sugar. For supper they had either fried steak, cold roast beef, corned beef hash, beef stew with potatoes or cold roast beef, along with white bread, butter or oleomargarine, coffee, condensed milk and sugar. FEW FRESH VEGETABLES The raids, in which fourteen French and British merchantmen were sunk, had yielded enormous quantities of coal for fuel, of fresh beef, white flour, sugar, oleomargarine, potatoes, cheese, condensed milk, white crackers, sweet biscuit, coffee, tea and sugar, and considerable quantities of canned vegetables, ham, bacon, beans, peas, beer, wine and spirits. They never resulted in any large haul of fresh vegetables or fruits. If such fresh vegetables and fruits as were captured had been divided among the crew, they would have sufficed for not more than one day. Therefore they were reserved for the officers' table, and so spread out from one raid to another. So, while all the officers showed some symptoms of anaemia and mild acidosis, none was prostrated. From their tissues and blood, the organised calcium, iron and potassium had not been robbed to the degree suffered by the men. SOUP AND PSYCHOLOGY M'Cann's " formula" was probably a shockingly insufficient procedure as seen through the eyes of an orthodox drug doctor. In

general it amounted to a hot-water infusion from whole foods to dissolve out their contained salts, draining off the liquor and feeding it as soup to the men, together with whole wheat bread. Along with the soup went the yolks of eggs and fresh, sweet, unskimmed milk. For psychological reasons he also allowed the men 1oz. of fresh roast beef daily, " because they had been brought up to believe that without meat they could not live." His " imperative " was that the men must avoid all cheese, whites of eggs, lard, fats of all kinds, white flour products such as crackers, biscuits, pastry and puddings, mashed potatoes, sugar, saccharine, salt meat and fish, also polished rice, pearl barley, and other acidforming foods. But the one I like best—and the one which provides a lead to the crofters and villagers at Aberfoyle—reads as follows: " Wash and peel potatoes. Discard potatoes. Retain the skins— Boil skins and give liquor to the men to drink—4 oz. a day." ALL THE ESSENTIAL FACTS For any reader who wishes to discover for himself what is wrong with feeding on white bread, butter and margarine, peeled potatoes, peeled grains, fresh meat, canned vegetables, condensed milk and sugar, some beans and an occasional piece of ham, the Kronprinz Wilhelm experiment provides all the essential data. The important point, however, is that none of these victims was in a bad way until more than eight months had elapsed. Then apparently quite suddenly they all began to go down with an acidosis which, but for the intervention of M'Cann, would have killed them within a few weeks at most. M'Cann, with his wholesome and wholesale remedying of the food faults, rather than worrying about which particular germ or virus had invaded the bodies of the victims, began to get results within hours. HOW TO LEARN A point he well made was that until they experienced this sudden prostration, these victims of civilised living would not have listened to his advice. Paralysed and panic-stricken and unable to stand, they were prepared to submit to any treatment, no matter how sensible or heroic or apparently absurd! Until they had undergone this dreadful

experience not one of them cared a sailor's knot about the importance of the organised salts and living qualities within foodstuffs. They had been so busy destroying ships that they did not notice how, in the meantime, the loss of the essential calcium and other minerals from their own tissues was wrecking their own lives just as surely. Like our medical profession, and through them our own population —and our breed of young athletes, whose bones break so readily— they had never learned that the use of denatured foods such as white bread, degerminated corn, refined sugar and muscle-meat, has been demonstrated repeatedly as the most active factor in destroying and removing the toughening calcium from human tissues. The same foods are a potent cause of fatty infiltration and degeneration of liver cells, and blood which is deficient in calcium does not coagulate readily. Mothers whose tissues have been deprived of a sufficiency of calcium produce babes who are either stillborn or handicapped for life by abnormal bone formations and deficiencies. Their teeth either do not erupt normally or, later, quickly decay. USELESS EXPERIMENTS ARE POPULAR But again I would emphasise that the commonly published statements about how so many students at some medical school have lived for so many weeks on this or that defective foodstuff without showing any signs of trouble are either intentionally misleading or utterly stupid nonsense. The sailors on the Kronprinz Wilhelm established with considerable precision the fact that any period of time less than about nine months for such an experiment is valueless—except for the Big Food Fakers. Here is an excellent illustration of how little the need for prolonged experiment is comprehended by the specialists involved. It is from The Scotsman (25:5:53) describing a conference of the Nutrition Society held in Edinburgh: . . . Dr. R. M. Kark dealt with the study of the effect of hard work in a cold climate on the susceptibility to scurvy, it having been held that such conditions made susceptibility greater. As an experiment he got volunteers from the U.S. Army and flew them overnight from warm Florida to the coldest parts of Canada, and made them work hard, pulling sleighs and doing other jobs.* * We are given no indication of how many days or weeks this hurry-up experiment continued.

Many of them had never seen snow before, but the experiment showed that effort in cold conditions did not increase the danger of scurvy.

Now let us see what happened as a result of M'Cann's " formula." The men began their soluble-alkali-saturation regime on 16th April 1915. At that time they were going down at the rate of 2 to 4 cases per day. QUICK RESULTS April 17, no new cases reported. Ditto April 18, and many of the more recent cases were already manifestly improving. In eighteen cases the swelling of the ankles had subsided and in a number of other cases the pain on pressure over the nerves was not so acute. April 19, four of the patients were so much improved that they were permitted to go on deck. On April 20, fourteen were discharged from the ship's hospital. On that date the ship's surgeon, Dr. Perrenon, reported to M'Cann: " The effects of the new treatment are remarkable." On the two succeeding days, 21st and 22nd April, a total of eighteen men were dismissed from hospital and by April 23, four of the more seriously involved patients were declared to be out of danger. April 24, seven more cases were dismissed from hospital and one of the men whose limbs had been completely paralysed was able to stand without help. After ten days 47 men were so far advanced toward recovery that Perrenon reported to M'Cann, " We can safely say they are cured." M'Cann himself, commenting on the outcome, calls his brilliant formula " the strangest prescription ever written " and tells how he had put the question to Dr. Perrenon: what could the American dietetic scientists say in the presence of such results. Perrenon's reply had been: " They can bow their heads." And he went on: " Some of them may be big men. Big men will accept the truth, no matter where they find it. As for me, my record is complete . . . our experience will not be lost to Germany." At this point M'Cann drew his attention to the fact that the cruiser was taking on coal and apparently making ready for another dash to sea. In other words: what was to happen if the records were lost? This is M'Cann's own description of how he was answered: . . . He looked at me. There was a pause. Then he spoke. " If we should be lost and our records destroyed a hundred of your American physicians and other

authorities have seen the cases. The effects of the remedy have also been seen. I think nothing can happen. . . ." It was his turn to leave a sentence hanging in the air unfinished. AILMENTS & ACCIDENTS Summing up the experience of the Kronprinz Wilhelm prior to her appearance in the James River, Dr. Perrenon said: "We had many cases of pneumonia, pleurisy and rheumatism among the men. They seemed to lose all resistance long before the epidemic broke out. We had superficial wounds, cuts, to deal with. They usually refused to heal for a long time. We had much haemorrhage. There were a number of accidents aboard, fractures and dislocations. The broken bones were slow to mend:* Nature was not doing her duty. Food is indeed the cause of much disease. In nine months we can learn much that is not to be found in the text-books." At 5.30 p.m., Saturday, 24th April 1915, Dr. Perrenon was ordered by his superiors to repress all facts concerning the conditions aboard the vessel. He would not admit that Bernstorff issued the orders but I was led to believe as much.

BLIND LEADERS The shameful fact is that from that day to this the brilliant demonstration carried out by M'Cann without a flaw has been lost to the peoples of Great Britain, the United States and France. Through their " food chemist " advisers the Governments of these great nations have refused to pass on the proven facts to their sadly degenerating peoples. So far as is known, even Germany did not profit by the lesson. It is useless to look toward the drug profession for a lead in such matters. Medical doctors, and especially medical students are con-ditioned by studies organised by selected experts. In many cases these high educational appointments are to be achieved only through the patronage of groups of wealthy and politically powerful manufacturing chemists and food adulterers. The result is that so far as Britain, U.S.A. and France are concerned, that beautifully complete and clean-cut demonstration of M'Cann's might just as well never have happened. No medical school passes on the vital findings to its students and the average practitioner has heard not a whisper of it. That is why he goes on vainly trying to pin down some virus or bacillus as responsible for the " incurableness " of his nutritionally deficient patients. That is why he * These aspects of nutrition are discussed in Healthy Childhood.

can imagine no alternative to poisoning his unhappy patient in the hope of destroying the supposedly causal virus or germ. From a strictly medical standpoint, McCann's approach to the problem was doubtless pitifully inadequate. He used no stains or microscopes or any other of the accepted means to uncover the bacillus or virus " causing " the breakdown. On the other hand his approach approximated that of Bernard Shaw in Everybody's Political What's What: " The statesman who can make our blood healthy by abolishing malnutrition, dirt and ignorance need not trouble about the microbe scare that has dominated and corrupted hygienic science for a century past." Even in the highest academic circles the names of M'Cann and Wylie are unknown. Nor can the hiatus now be bridged. You see, these bright men broke the sacred, if unwritten, rules of a highly involved game. The trouble is that they made no effort to cover their tracks. They used no drugs, physical or mental. Any reasonably literate layman can understand every word they used and follow their expositions without the slightest difficulty. It is a sad fact that among " well-educated people " of orthodox outlook no new idea is readily investigated on its own merits. All too often, they remain sublimely unaware of the " infernal network " enmeshing their cerebrations and philosophies. All of which may help to explain why the Kronprinz Wilhelm experiment remains terra incognita et damnata for orthodox nutritionists. In Rude Health for April 1953 C. Leslie Thomson, in an article entitled:—HEALTHY FOODSTUFFS—ESPECIALLY BREAD—IN THE NEWS, points out that: " Many people who have only read in the press about the ' House-wives' League ' and the ' Scottish Housewives' Association ' are led to believe them to be just a bunch of political busy-bodies. (I trust the Housewives will forgive me for putting it so crudely). Our political leaders have nothing good to say for them, and one might well wonder why they seem to be so universally disliked by those in high places. The answer can be readily deduced by any one who cares to read one or two issues of Housewives To-day or the booklet Scottish Housewives' Association (Each 3d. per copy plus postage: addresses respectively, 2 Stepney Green, London, E.I, and 12 Lothian Drive, Clarkston, Renfrewshire). Far from limiting

themselves to political argument, the publications of these sister organisations devote much of their space to exposing the numerous rackets which bedevil the nation's foodstuffs and drinks. Rude Health readers who often ask why we don't " answer " misleading articles in the daily press should be interested to see examples in these publications of what happens when sensible, conscientious letters are sent to the popular newspapers." The total result is that few doctors, and even fewer members of the public, ever hear a word of such vitally important experiments as that carried out by McCann. But world-wide publicity is freely available to the cunning ones who know how, and are sufficiently prepared, to use the correct channels. LOST OPPORTUNITIES Had M'Cann been born with a rodent mentality, everlasting fame and a great fortune could have been his. To-day every orthodox textbook on dietetics would have contained references to his work. All he had to do was to come to an understanding with the ship's surgeon—assuming that to have been possible. Then with two pairs of tightly sealed lips, a small bottle of coloured water, a hypodermic syringe, and armed with his already intensely painful experiences of how the food-faking groups arrange their publicity and their favours, the two of them would have been set for unquestioned success. To have obtained the plaudits of the financially interested groups first he should have called for a Top Secret Conference with the ship's officers. He could then have mentioned that their own medical staff and the twenty or so specialists from nearby States had all failed to diagnose the condition or suggest any helpful treatment. Next he could have brought out the bottle containing his world-shaking, miracle-working liquid. As yet far too scarce and precious to be used on the general public—what he held in his hand was the world's total stock at that moment—he was making a free gift of it for the purpose of restoring their sorely afflicted comrades to health again: to banish from their tortured bodies the infection which had fallen upon them. But there must be one condition: their solemn promises, individually that not a word of what he would tell them must ever be divulged to any living person. Having received that pledge, he could have gone on to explain that he had diagnosed the disease as the B/X 42 variety of Beri-beri, and the liquid he held in his hand was " M'C

314-52" (his own 314th experiment before achieving success, and calling for the pineal glands from 52 reindeer to make one dose for one patient), unbelievably expensive, but the only known remedy for " B/X 42." FOR APPLAUSE AND FORTUNE . . . From that point he could have gone ahead exactly as before, merely explaining that the potato peelings and the various infusions were required for their buffer effects. They were known to be neutralisers of the otherwise often painful side-effects of " M'C 31452," that power-ful and mystic liquor which alone could seek out and destroy the evil B/X 42 virus. Naturally the secret would quickly reach the ears of the manufacturing pharmacists. M'Cann would be approached to supervise the early processing of the spectacularly collected pineal glands—i.e., until an even more marvellous synthetic had been worked out—and both he and Surgeon Perrenon would have been called to Washington to receive the Congressional medal. Doubtless a special meeting of the Nobel Prize Committee would have been called also to honour these famous men. Possibly, under the peculiar circumstances, even the British Ambassador would have been ordered to overlook the artificial barriers of war, and hand over the appropriate honours and orders to these self-sacrificing heroes. . . . AND EVERLASTING INFAMY On that basis, beyond question, by now M'Cann would have held an honoured place in the profession; possibly even higher than that enjoyed by these unspeakable rogues, Pasteur and Jenner. PROTEIN: A CLINICAL DISCUSSION Clinical Discussions are a feature of Tuesday mornings at Kingston. They take the popular form of questions by patients and spontaneous answers by senior E.S.N.T. students. The following is a brief report of one such session. (Q.) What is the connection between cleansing food and calories ? Are there sufficient calories in a Food Reform diet to meet the daily energy requirements of a vigorous person ? Christopher Grenshaw, B.Sc.—Calories are stressed as a means of measuring food requirements by Governments and Food

Scientists, when food, particularly fats and proteins are in short supply. If calories were the only requirement it would be possible to live on the daily three bottles of the beer that extensively advertises its high calorific content. A well balanced Food Reform diet of 60% fruit and vegetables, 20% proteins and 20% starches and fats, by weight, will provide all the energy requirements as well as the other highly important elements for maintaining bodily health. Maurice Johnston.—When the cleansing elements (fruits and vegetables particularly) are increased and the down-to-earth proteins, fats and starches reduced, the diet becomes very actively cleansing. As a general rule, those patients whose diet has been the very opposite of cleansing are recommended to keep to a diet which emphasises fruits and vegetables. Children and pregnant women and those in normal health are recommended not to adopt a strict cleansing diet, but the usual food reform diet that has sufficient living elements to provide the necessary cleansing qualities. (Q.) But surely this diet—particularly the breakfast of koumiss and lettuce—would not be enough for miners, steel workers and the like? Patricia Sandys Hill.—Almost certainly it would be difficult for a miner to adopt this regime and not feel some lack of energy in the first few weeks, and particularly if he were not convinced that breakfast could be omitted, and that the salads were an adequate substitute for his normal " piece." What is not realised is the hard work that is required to digest a heavy meal and the inadvisability of doing other heavy work at the same time. Since the quality of the food that the miners eat is, as a rule, poor, they usually demand large quantities to " keep up their strength." Hence the tendency of these men to suffer from starch poisoning, " hidden hunger "—call it what you will—and not only are they inefficient in transforming food into work, but they can, and do, as a result suffer many physical distresses in later life. All the food requirements for heavy work are in the ordinary Nature Cure diet. But the secret lies in a high degree of digestive ability: as important and almost as rare to the modern human as the philosopher's stone was to the ancient alchemist. Paddy Robins.—This diet, modified where necessary by including a light breakfast, is sufficient for a heavy worker. A sedentary worker needs less.

Susan Hammerton.—Food is vital and becomes more so as the amount of physical hard work is increased. Where sheer hard work, or stamina and endurance, is called for the type of food is more important than any other single factor. Looked at in this light, the food upon which our next expedition is going to attempt Everest is quite fantastic. Among other things they are taking 2,000 3½ lb. packs of daily rations. These contain white flour, biscuits, two types of sweets, orange acid powder, two packets of white sugar, tea, coffee, dried milk, cheese and pemmican. Apart from the obvious comment that the expedition does not consider Everest worth climbing unless the members can brew tea at frequent intervals, only the dried milk, cheese and possibly the pemmican (if it is genuine it is made with the old recipe of dried meat, oatmeal and dried vegetables—not at all likely in these scientific days) have any sustaining qualities. The rest of the food is based on the Calories for Energy theory at its worst. I would not be surprised if, on this food, our climbers were no more successful on the expedition than Scott was on the same sort of food. Against this, however, is the fact that Everest should be a short term experiment while Arctic and Antartic expeditions are essentially carried out over much longer periods of time and so constitute a more searching test. A strong will can drive a poorly nourished body for only a limited time. (Q.) What sort of protein is recommended ? When Mr Thomson mentions meat he says it should be swallowed—not chewed—raw, does this also apply to nuts, cheese and other dairy protein ? Gladys Wann, B.Sc.—The digestion of meat is by acid in the stomach. Chewing it in the mouth is unnecessary in that it would impregnate the meat with the starch-digesting saliva, and this, if any thing, would impede the later digestion of the meat. Nuts and cheese, on the other hand, do contain varying quantities of other foods for which chewing can be useful. Hammerton.—It is true that fish and chicken are recommended medically because they are first class proteins. But their easy digestibility and easy putrefaction are the chief reasons why people who want to be healthy should avoid them. Only by tackling the more-difficult-to-digest foods will digestion and health improve. Invalid foods are only to be recommended for those who wish to be invalids.

Mary Wolstenholme, S.R.N.—One of the rules-of-thumb about whether or not the food is fit to eat is the length of time it takes to mature. In this way just as oak provides better quality wood than pine, so beef has the advantage over chicken, and cabbage over lettuce. Most foods are better eaten fresh and when they are young and tender. (Q.) What is first class protein ? Wann.—One method of classification is to take the ease of digestion; that is the availability of the protein. Thus meat and fish are first class protein, cheese is a second class protein and legumes provide third class protein. Grenshaw.—The physical classification is by the number of amino acids—the final assimilated form of the protein when digested. If all the essential amino acids are present, as in meat, fish, eggs and cheese, the classification is " first class." Second class protein is deficient in some of the essential amino acids (which are supposed to be an essential growth factor). Legumes, maize, nuts and wheat come into this category. In Nature Cure the categories are determined by the final effect of the protein. By this system dairy protein is reckoned to be first class; all things being normal (and under present-day farming practice they rarely are) the animal puts its best into the development of its young. For that reason eggs, milk and milk products are likely to be of a better quality protein than the muscle tissue of the animal. Certainly they do not contain the acid waste that is bound to be in the muscle tissue of the animal. The final point is that because of the higher quality, the rate of putrefaction is very much reduced. Vegetables—of the brassica family—contain what is probably the best protein, since it is the original. The problem here, as Miss Hill has indicated, is that of availability. Very few people, and they are the exceptionally healthy people, have the ability to get this protein out of their cabbage, and that means that most of us have to make do with the next best, dairy proteins. It has been assumed until recently that amino acids were the pre-dominant factor or reason for protein being a " growing food." Recently it has been realised that Vitamin B12, so abundant in penicillin waste, and in liver, is a vital factor in growth production. (Q.) Is it from penicillin waste that pigs are now being fed ? What are the reasons for this and what are the likely consequences ?

Grenshaw.—It is assumed that the penicillin, or other antibiotic, given direct, kills some intestinal bacteria which retard the growth of the animal. We would suggest that the mechanism is that the animal, in attempting to dilute the poisonous material, takes in water and puts on weight, in exactly the same way artificials increase the weight of vegetables. The antibiotic waste, or felt, is rich in Vitamin B12 which has already been mentioned as a vital growth constituent. Hill.—By feeding pigs and poultry with antibiotic wastes, which can now legally be added to feeding stuffs, their weight can be increased by one-quarter on one-fifth less food. The effect on pigs seems to be the production of sterility, but since these animals are not used for breeding but only for killing this factor is not important—at least not to the producer. But sterility is the ultimate biological condemnation, and sterile meat, eaten by humans, may produce sterility. So it is surely unfit for human consumption. The government's attitude in introducing the Penicillin for Pigs Bill was that no ill effects had been proved in pigs over a short twelve months, and that any method of producing more protein should be encouraged. (Q.) Since grouse and other game live under natural conditions, are they acceptable where other animal protein, which has been specially bred for the table, are not? Johnston.—Grouse may live in a wild habitat, but they live on land which is deficient in many ways, including protein value, due to extensive sheep farming, that the land is fit for nothing better than this so-called sport. In addition grouse are deliberately protected from their natural predators, which means that the invalids among them survive, and have their natural food freely supplemented by cereals, and even food pellets, manufactured by chemical firms. As a comment on commercial morality, the same firm supplies the cartridges for their ultimate destruction. That was the final point of the discussion. This is not a verbatim report, but if not strictly accurate in the letter, it is so in the spirit. SPIRITUAL HEALING I would like to have your views on spiritual healing. There seems to be little doubt of many permanent cures of all types of disease. Some " healers " are spiritualists, others orthodox Christians who

believe they are instruments of the same power that was used by Jesus and his disciples. Others cannot explain the source of their gifts. Many sincere people accept the orthodox view of disease, in fact we may say that they go in for prayer but no fasting!—C. B., Pembury. As any established Nature Cure adherent should know, we believe in selfhealing as the dominant feature in health maintenance. The Nature Cure symbol (see Note p. 137 and accompanying sketch) covers the real point brought out in this question. We do not believe that any part of the living body works in a watertight compartment. Without mental and physical support, the spiritual (or ethical) side of the human being would be powerless to effect a cure. My favourite illustration of this type of fragmentation thinking is the man who would attempt to cycle from Edinburgh to London using only the handlebars and pedals of his bicycle (the parts through which he supplies guidance and driving force to his machine) leaving behind frame, saddle, wheels and tyres, chain, etc. My own impression is that he would not get very far, as a cyclist, under these conditions. On the other hand we have repeatedly noted that so long as spiritual healing is accepted as a possibility, the usual effects of damaging addenda (e.g., taking drugs or allowing unnecessary surgical interference) would be lessened in direct proportion to the intensity of the individual's faith. To that extent also genuine healing would not be inhibited by doubts and fears, or by the physical interferences so usual among all allegedly educated and civilised peoples. Much of the philosophy of Nature Cure inheres to these everyday words—wholeness and wholesomeness. Much of the essential balance and unity of personal experience can be lost if we emphasise one element or quality out of its due proportion. Inevitably that leads to a corresponding denigration of other qualities. Admittedly these may be of less importance in our estimation, but danger exists because we do not know all the factors involved.

But there is one grave possibility which may be readily demonstrated. Elsewhere I have gone into this difficulty* as it applies to the medical doctor. Throughout his student years this trained practitioner has spent much time and study concentrated upon disease symptoms, and always such a practitioner becomes genuinely alarmed when he meets the outward symptoms of vigorous health. As a rule he has never met them before, nor has he had any instruction about what a really healthy person looks like, nor how normal physiology should react in emergencies. Accordingly all his efforts go out to stop these surface symptoms to the great detriment of the underlying physiology and structural material. That is why, from our angle, it is of the utmost importance to be sure that what we are attempting to stop is not some intensively useful process, essential to our health-maintenance or recovery. This is no small matter because I am quite convinced that I have looked on at intervals through the years while several earnest and misguided people have slowly and surely killed themselves through a miscon-ception about a health activity. What they were attempting to stop and what they ultimately succeeded in preventing, was an entirely beneficent regenerative act on the part of their own physiology. In a general way we are usually rather foolish when we pit our intellectual powers against our own vastly more experienced somatic sense. As the poet advises: " Thy body is a great intelligence." I have given some indication of the brilliant work carried out by the psychosomatic forces in Smoking: the Case Against Tobacco. After all, the achievement of painlessness and a serene aloofness from the worrying events taking place around us, is scarcely a lofty ideal. If one cares to think it over, it comes rather too close to complete morbidity—a living death—to be a wholly satisfactory solution of our problems. Perhaps if we had more faith in our bodily forces, and could be free from our mental resistances, we could easily go through all kinds of experiences to a fuller and better life. That would mean more time and a more intense mental awareness, which would in general lead to the ideal aimed at in our philosophy, a calmer, greater enjoyment and increased appreciation of an active and vigorous life on all three * See Introduction to Appendicitis.

planes of our being, just as has been postulated repeatedly by philosophers throughout written history. A careful study of the symbol should be rewarding for any one who has begun to sense the deeper aspects of Nature Cure. It is, as it were, An Architect's Ground Plan, upon which to develop a more complete and wholesome personality. It outlines the foundations upon which to build health for infant, child and adult. THE " JUSTERS " I see it as the answer to the pitifully oversimplified " just " mentality. (In most cases the " just " stage soon passes in the Nature Cure adherent's progress, but long after he has realised the misconception he meets it again and again at every turn of the path. That is because most of our opponents remain enthusiastic " justers." They insist that " it is just diet," or " just spinal manipulation," or " just not smoking," or eating grapes, or black strap molasses, or walking on damp grass, or yoga, or chewing grass, or fasting, or cold baths, or brown bread, or deep breathing, or exercises, or osteopathy, or com-presses, or herbalism, or Christian science, or enemas, or theosophy, or vegetarianism, or salads, or buttermilk, or wishful thinking, or weight lifting, or posture, or muscle control—or any other " just.") The symbol is an excellent synopsis of the Nature Cure philosophy and a revelation of its essential wholeness. Provided the major teachings are understood and put into active practice before serious damage has been done to any vital organ, possibilities for the attainment of High Level Health open up astonishingly. Soon the body should build up more endurance, alertness and resiliency. With training in vital awareness there is more ready and more rapid response to passing emergencies and difficulties. As a result injuries are repaired more speedily and more efficiently. Another interesting result is that as the adherent's thinking becomes more constructive the frequency of accidents and injuries experienced becomes markedly, reduced.* These are some of the reasons why I have suggested the practical effect of Nature Cure living as:— MORE DAYS PER LIFE AND MORE LIFE PER DAY. * See pp. 72, 73, Healthy Childhood, by Jessie R. Thomson.

The following case history was written (without reference to us) by the patient involved in the hope of encouraging another sufferer to take up the Nature Cure way of life. We have the permission of the writer to include it in the present volume " in the hope that it may be the means of helping more people towards health." Once again, notice how health has improved in all its aspects. There is not only a lessening of this or that discomfort; the writer now knows what it is to be alive and well. These are the key words. ASTHMA, HAY FEVER AND ECZEMA ELIMINATED BY N.C. Most people who suffer from one or more of these complaints are aware that they are very closely allied to one another, and often they experience as I did the way in which orthodox medical treatment succeeds in suppressing one trouble (e.g., eczema), only to find the body makes a further desperate attempt to throw off its poisons, and starts to produce a different type of disease such as asthma. ECZEMA As far as I can make out I must have had this wretched complaint almost as soon as I was born, and I still have its scars on my body dating from my earliest childhood. According to my mother it was also very bad on my head when I was a tiny baby (and a very tiny one at that!) In fact I was rarely without it until I developed asthma, the outbreaks being sometimes of the dry form but much more often the open wet sores of weeping eczema, the attacks being far worse in the springtime and might come anywhere on my person though the most frequent sites were from the groin to the lower thigh and from elbow down to finger tips and up to armpits. The last bad attack of eczema in my late teens simply smothered both arms. I must have been about 8 or 9 years old when I was reprimanded by my parent for not having daubed some visible site (arm?) with the usual prescribed zinc ointment. " No I haven't—it only seems to make it worse." " Oh nonsense, what a wicked thing to say! " " Well so it does, it seems to scab it over and then it all breaks out all round the scab like a fairy-ring and it's bigger than it was before." Knowing what I now know of the teaching of Nature Cure I can only comment —" Out of the mouths of babes . . ." and do my best to spread the news of Nature Cure so that a few people may be saved from going through what I did.

HAY FEVER This too was with me from birth, my mother testifying that she could not understand why my nose was always running when I hadn't a cold. I had it very badly every summer right through to the end of my teens when it turned into asthma. SPECIAL ALLERGIES (1) Fish.—When I was first given fish as a baby I was violently sick, came up in blotches, was purple in the face and yelled all night while mother had to carry me round. In my teens I was still so sensitive that my face swelled up very greatly when fish was being cooked in the school kitchen four floors below the laboratory where we worked. (2) Grass.—As a small child in socks I could not walk in grass because my legs came up in large blains from contact with grass. The pollen of course upset me as too did the juice in the air from freshly cut non-flowering grass which I did not know had been cut! EARS, NOSE AND THROAT I had my adenoids removed and tonsils cut at the age of 9 years because I was very deaf and the operation did relieve this. I always had a great deal of catarrh for which I had my nose cauterised but without effect in 1940, and an X-ray showed no sinus infection. Colds always tended to affect my larynx and in 1943 I lost my voice entirely with a cold early in January and it was 8 months before it returned in spite of all the attempts to coax it to start functioning again. However the hospital had said that they could not find anything organically wrong, and that it probably would come back as it eventually did, probably I think due to the summer sunshine as much as anything else. ASTHMA When I was 19 I had acute tonsilitis, laryngitis and bronchitis in succession in May and they eventually cleared up but later that summer when hay fever time arrived, I realised that for the first time I had asthma. I had some allergy tests and injections for this but the asthma was not removed and I always had a very miserable summer due to the attacks of hay-asthma.

It became steadily worse each year with slight variations owing to the dryness or otherwise of the summer weather and the amount of pollen about, but in addition whenever I had a cold in the winter I developed an attack of bronchial asthma, whereas previously it would have remained as a catarrhal head cold. In 1944 I started my usual bout in the early summer and this turned out to be the beginning of nine months sick leave. Although I was taking all kinds of capsules, tablets and medicine, etc., and frequently giving myself injections of adrenalin I could never sleep more than about two hours at a time. That particular summer I had had practically no sleep for months on end and I was rapidly becoming a nervous wreck. Matters were not improved by the advent of the flying bombs, of which we counted no less than 51 going over the house in one day. My doctor was always most anxious to do all he could to try to help me, and he managed in face of the many obstacles at that time to get me into the country branch of one of the big London hospitals for observation. Unfortunately that turned out to be the very worst thing for me because in hospital you are woken up to get washed at the early morning time when asthmatics will know is their only chance of snatching an hour or so of sleep. While I was there I went out of my mind and became schizophrenic and started hearing voices talking to me, and as I was no longer primarily a case for a general hospital ward I was taken home and eventually went as a voluntary patient to a hospital specialising in nervous and mental diseases. My physical condition may be guessed at when I say that I am nearly 5 feet 9 inches tall but at that time only weighed 6 stones. After 3½ months there during which time I had insulin treatment I went home for two months convalescence before resuming work. The asthma had not been too troublesome while I was there, but I kept having to lay off the treatment because of it until I persuaded the doctor in charge to give me some tablets at night to keep the asthma down to manageable intensity in the same way as I always had to at home in order to keep going to business at all. Before I had been back at work a week I had a very bad morning and a friend, who began by saying that I ought not to have come in, asked if I had ever tried dieting for it. Well I was already interested in the subject but such information as I had up till then about Nature

Cure was so tied up with insistence upon the use of enemas that I had never done more than try vegetarian (usually salad) meals for lunch in town before the war. This friend went on to tell me about the ideas taught by Mr James C. Thomson of the Kingston Clinic, Edinburgh, and said that in his opinion this was the establishment which held first place in Nature Cure teaching. I said that I could not do anything about it just then as I had promised my doctor I would go to a specialist he recommended for a new series of tests to see if I could not be desensitised; but we did discuss the subject from time to time. In the autumn of 1945 I went for these tests and he was not at all hopeful as he said that I had had it so long and so badly that really almost anything was liable to set off an attack. He did confirm though that I was especially sensitive to grass pollen! (see note on Special Allergies). However I had the course of gradually increasing injections for desensitising, lasting from New Year to just before the hay-fever season. The result was a complete washout, as in 1946 I had no less than 14 weeks sick leave between April and October. The climax came while my doctor was away. His locum gave me capsules of some new mixture of drugs and these gave me slight heart attacks as well as the acute breathlessness from the asthma and this nearly drove me frantic. Also by the time he returned I was so anaemic that I was being plugged with liver injections. At the height of this misery I decided to wait till the worst of the summer was past, have a week's holiday in Edinburgh in October and see Mr Thomson and find out if he could offer me any possible hope. I naturally told my doctor what I was proposing to do and he was very doubtful about the whole business, but possibly owing to the fact that he knew me well enough to realise that I was not a person to be easily deflected from my purpose he did not attempt to do so. Mr Thomson gave me a very thorough examination and said that if I was prepared to put my back into it and do what they suggested he could not see any reason why I should not ultimately get rid of the asthma though it would take a fairly long time. I left there with fresh hope and a good deal of Nature Cure literature which I took home and read from cover to cover and considered long.

OVER TO NATURE CURE I finally decided to take the plunge in January 1947 when I had just recovered from a bad attack of asthma and therefore was a lot clearer of phlegm than usual. At that time I stopped using all the pills, injections, medicine, etc., except my inhaler (of the atomiser variety) and also made some changes in my diet, e.g., cutting down my starch intake and making certain that I had a salad every day. In August 1948 I spent my two weeks holiday at the Kingston Clinic and I was very cheered because Mr Thomson told me that the changes I had made in my habits had resulted in my having greatly reduced the hyper-acidity with which my system had been heavily overloaded when he saw me in October 1946. I felt that I had achieved something on my own. While I was there I was on a fairly strict diet and had massage and manipulative treatment particularly to the part of my spine which had got so much out of the straight owing to years when it was impossible to stand upright. However, probably the most helpful thing was the way in which one could discuss with practitioners what Nature Cure was and the best way in which to aim at changing one's daily habits into something likely to lead to Health. I had three weeks holiday at Kingston in 1949 August and September and the report was that I had made progress in the year and indeed I knew this as slowly but surely the improvement I sought was coming about. At home I was trying to stick as nearly as possible to the Kingston diet (I became a vegetarian, on their advice and according to my own inclination, after my first stay there) and used cold waist compresses as I had been shown. I had not been able to give up using my inhaler though after each stay there I had managed to continue for longer without it. In 1950 I decided to go to Edinburgh for two weeks in May before my bad time started, then when the hay fever season came I cleaned up all my inhalers and took them to my orthodox Doctor saying " Look, can you use these, I want to get rid of them? " I should say that he had been most helpful to me in my following of Nature Cure—in the early stages when he had to come to give me a certificate for sick leave for asthma he did not press drugs upon me but gently reminded me of deep breathing and other things in a way that increased my faith in the final result of my efforts to help myself.

He said he was sure that I should find it easier psychologically if I had completely got rid of the inhalers. I knew that it was going to be a difficult summer for me and so I arranged to spend another two weeks at Kingston in September and after a time it was such hard going that I found myself counting " Eight weeks gone, seven to go " etc., until I returned there. However I did win through and since that summer I have never felt that I even needed an inhaler again and of course I have never taken any other drugs since 1947. After that time I went again in May in 1951 and 1952 and I hope to repeat it this year, because after a lifetime of ill-health there are still things which have not quite cleared up though they are all progressing very well. RESULTS OF NATURE CURE TREATMENT ON ASTHMA With regard to the asthma I gladly record that in 1952 although it was a very bad year for asthma and hay fever and I had an intense emotional shock through the death of a friend, I did not have any trace of asthma and this was only four years after my first stay at Kingston. In addition to this I went swimming, did up to 15 mile walks and I was able to mow lawns for two hours without turning a hair, while my brother was streaming with hay fever. Later in the year, in the Great Fog, all that happened to me was that I lost my voice for a few days but had no sign of asthma. I had been on the Disablement Register but when the renewal notice came in November 1951 I was able to write to the M. of L. saying that it was no longer necessary for me to be registered and stated what had happened. SOME OTHER INCIDENTAL GOOD RESULTS (1) Eyes.—Although I still wear spectacles (I have used them for over twenty years and do very close mathematical work) I hope to be able to dispense with them eventually. In the meantime the good diet and healthy Nature Cure living have stopped my sight getting worse as rapidly as it was doing before. My rough test is that I can still see the numbers of the hymns from the back of the Church without the slightest effort, and it is over three years since I had my eyes tested. (2) Teeth.—I went for my annual dental overhaul in December 1952 and there was nothing to be done. My dentist said he was

interested in it as a remarkable clinical phenomenon because my teeth and gums were now in splendid condition and asked if I would mind if he fetched his partner to look at it. He said that about three years ago when he saw my name in the appointment book he said to himself " I know what this is going to be—extractions." That was until he'd seen my mouth and then he promptly asked what I had been doing. I remembered that because he had been very interested in the Nature Cure way. He said later that he had expected me to have a thoroughgoing condition of pyorrhoea judging from the previous state of teeth and gums. His partner said my teeth looked as if they had never had any tartar on them but in fact they used to be so bad they needed scaling about every three months and they had not been touched for over two years. In telling his partner of my general physical condition he said: " I saw you one day sitting on the golf course and I said to myself then that you would not have much longer to live—you had that sort of look about you that you could not last much longer." They were both very interested in what I told them of Nature Cure and the partner's comment was that most people could never be bothered to keep it up. However they agreed that when you began to see the results which I was getting it was obviously well worthwhile continuing. (3) Rheumatism.—I used to have acute pain down my neck and shoulder and this pain has almost vanished, partly due to the manipulative treatment and no doubt to the better posture which I have been able to achieve. (4) Eczema.—The first obvious healing crisis (apart from attacks of asthma) which occurred with me was that I had outbreaks of weeping eczema in my ears and on the exact patches of my arms and legs where I used to give myself injections of adrenalin. I had felt that the Nature Cure theory of the body taking some other way of throwing off what had previously been suppressed was a bit farfetched but this occurrence convinced me with no further shadow of doubt. I also had an upheaval in 1952 while at Kingston in which the most prominent feature was a violent outbreak of eczema on both hands but as the general crisis went over under Nature Cure methods the eczema cleared up very speedily and I think on only one night did it really cause me to lose sleep through the irritation.

(5) Circulation.—I always used to feel the cold very badly and get broken chilblains but this last winter I did not have any at all. CONCLUSION I have proved that under a Nature Cure regime it is possible to overcome asthma and begin to know what it means to be alive and well. Diet, exercises and manipulation have all played their part but 1 think the biggest factor has been the gradually dawning realisation that my body was able to do its own healing, and the great freedom of spirit which comes from being completely independent of drug therapy after such a struggle to achieve that independence. After years during which I conscientiously followed all the suggestions made by doctor, specialist and hospital I became steadily worse but now I am aware that I am getting better all the time. The psychological effect of this on one's life after knowing that doctors could do nothing for you needs to be experienced to be believed. My doctor remarked quite spontaneously one day that my cure was miraculous and indeed when I consider how in 1944 it was as much as I could do to crawl from bed to sit in a chair in my bedroom it does rather take on that appearance. However those who believe in and follow Nature Cure teaching realise that it was only the result of stopping doing the things that were making me ill and allowing my body a chance to heal itself and if other people could only see this and do the same they too would begin to get similar results. —C. M. B., Surrey (April 1953).

" Even the agent appointed to protect the beneficiaries occupied himself on behalf of the family."

THE TAIT BEQUEST During the war I had a visit from a young medical student in a state of considerable mental perturbation. Earlier in the day, in a large Edinburgh institution, he had listened to a discussion on the case of a woman suffering from cancer of the stomach. The surgeon in charge had informed the group that the tumour was inoperable; the only thing they could do was to send her home to die. Apparently with some feeling one of the younger practitioners had asked " Is there really no other procedure available—no treatment of any kind at all ? " According to my informant's story, the older man had looked at his questioner rather quizzically, then out of a blue sky asked: " Do you know that man Thomson? " The younger practitioner's reply was in the negative, so the surgeon went on to explain that soon after the war began the Nature Cure people were left £30,000* by a wealthy Edinburgh banker " but, thank God, we got it away from them." This remark had upset the younger man. Apparently it was his first experience of medical " ethics " as they apply to competitors. Quietly he had announced that he was all for fair play. If the money was left to the Nature Cure Movement it should have gone to them. The profession should have taken no part in influencing the decision. By this time other practitioners were gathering around and his reproof brought a violent reaction from the surgeon. Angrily he was asked: " Are you on their side or ours? " Once again the young man

* The story of the Tait Bequest scandal has been carefully screened from the general public. It involved a bequest of £30,000, two farms and a mansion house in its own extensive grounds complete with furniture, ready for occupation. All to be used to provide residential treatment " by the methods of the Edinburgh School of Natural Therepeutics as taught and practised by James C. Thomson, Edinburgh. . . ." A health colony for our poorer patients. By chicanery in high places, at a secret hearing in Edinburgh, this magnificent bequest was lost to its splendid ideal and diverted into the pockets of an Edinburgh lawyer and his relatives. The case for Nature Cure was not heard. Only medical evidence (i.e., that of our opponents) on the practicability of the scheme was presented to the three judges. Professor Hayek's suggestion would appear to be coming true: " The minority who retain an inclination to criticise must be silenced."

began to explain that his objection was on general principles but he was interrupted with: " Answer me, Sir! Are you for us or against us —yes or no? " To this direct question had come a rather hesitating admission that he upheld orthodoxy. With that the incident ended. But as soon as the class was over, my informant fresh from that shocking exposition came out to The Kingston Clinic to obtain full particulars about the bequest. He related the incident and we gladly placed all available information at his disposal. THE PERFECT DEMONSTRATION Perhaps at this point it may be well to explain the probable reason for my name cropping up on that occasion. Many years ago the mother of another (then) young medical practitioner was brought to us suffering from what had been diagnosed as inoperable cancer of the stomach. But much had happened before we saw her. As the young doctor's home was in Edinburgh he had obtained, one by one, the opinions of his professor and other consultants in the city, Each had given the same verdict ; nothing could be done. The condition was far advanced and there was no hope and no room for doubt: his mother had but a short time to live. To cut a long story short, under Nature Cure procedures, without operations or drugs of any kind, she recovered completely and quite uneventfully. Last heard of some months ago—now quite an old lady —she is still remarkably fit. Although the son was badly shaken, unlike most orthodox practi-tioners he refused to keep quiet about this demonstration of Nature Cure within his own home. Accordingly his mother's experience was much discussed among the younger doctors and students and created no little distress throughout the higher academic circles of Edinburgh University. One result was that many letters began to appear in our local newspapers and for a time we enjoyed the freedom of the press. For several months all our lectures and any letters we cared to send in were given full display and several aspects of Nature Cure came under sympathetic discussion.

PRESS, LAW AND MEDICINE COLLABORATE Then quite suddenly unpleasant things began to happen to the young practitioner and without warning of any kind our local press closed down on Nature Cure publicity. Obviously strings had been pulled. All that is ancient history but from that student's report I deduce that some of the principal actors still retain a vivid memory of the episode. One outstanding lesson we may learn from the experience of that young doctor. Notice that although the medical consultants discovered how complete and satisfactory could be the results obtained by natural methods their activities did not then become concentrated upon discovering how it was done. Not at all. Their first anxiety was to make things awkward for the young practitioner who talked too much and to make certain that the truth about these more modern methods must not become public property. By such watchful and forceful action against new ideas has the present monopoly of the drug profession been achieved. Also instructive it was to discover, after that furtive legal hearing, that no local newspaper found space to mention the gross, secret and carefully planned miscarriage of justice. The principle has been well stated by George Orwell: The notion that certain opinions cannot safely be allowed a hearing is growing . . . . Even those who declare themselves to be in favour of justice generally drop their claim when the injustice falls upon an adversary.

In the case of the Tait Bequest our opponents seem to have gone well beyond Orwell's postulate. They not only made sure that injustice would be done; they are so satisfied with the result that they thank God for His aid in arranging " this just, this pious fraud." Unofficially we have had one Counsel's opinion as to the advisability of an appeal against that decision. In quite a friendly way he strongly advises us that, with the money now in the hands of a wealthy man who is also one of Edinburgh's Leading Legal Lights, the forces against us would be too strong. Two of his phrases remain imprinted on my memory:— (A) " Now, had the estate been left to some medical charity . . ."

(B) ". . . and after all, Mr Thomson, you are not the loser—it is your poorer patients who should appeal—it is they who were the intended beneficiaries." He also indicated that, under the peculiar circumstances, nobody in the same profession could very well present our case with any degree of enthusiasm. " A fellow feeling makes us wond'rous kind." WHAT WAS DONE AND WHAT IS BEING DONE Even so, the following letter from behind the legal curtain came from a sympathetic Edinburgh barrister: " One of the three judges you should quote is Lord Mackay: ' In very few cases coming before us have I felt so keen an anxiety in adjusting our duties as overseers of trusts, as directors of our own officer placed by the Outer House in charge of this testator's special bequest, and at the same time the duty of judging fairly of the reasons antagonistic to the bequest, put forward by a number of the family with obvious large interests to obtain a judicial affirmation of a resulting trust in their favour. My feeling of difficulty has not been lessened in that I think that considerable misconceptions of the true doctrines of law and of the duties of a judicial factor accepting such office have, at more than one juncture, been apparent. The true view of onus demonstrandi only came into effect when counsel and his junior addressed us during the second hearing, and stated for the first time that they were appearing here on behalf of the minuters.'

" The language is involved and probably difficult for the layman to follow, but what chance had Nature Cure? The foregoing means that even the agent appointed by the Court to protect the beneficiaries innocently explained to the Judges that he occupied himself on behalf of the family." (It would be interesting to learn who briefed him!) As one English J.P. wrote at the time: " There cannot be a shadow of doubt that the late Adam Tait meant to endow the Nature Cure Movement." But all is not lost. Already the Tait Vision Fund (now at £10,000) has helped many needy patients back to health. If every reader of these lines would send a small donation, all the missing items could be replaced and the plan could go into full operation. (Still to come: £20,000, a mansion house fully furnished, and two farms.) Thanking you, Dear Reader, in anticipation—even one small farm would help a lot!

Fuller particulars (so far as we have them) are contained in THE TAIT BEQUEST, obtainable from the Treasurer, The Tait Vision Fund, Kingston Clinic, Edinburgh, 9—by post 3d. (Please send your help at the same time). With the type of this edition set up, and the final proofs corrected, the sad news comes that the elderly patient mentioned several times in this book whose recovery created so much disturbance in higher medical circles has passed on at the ripe age of 83 years. His mere survival over the years has been a thorn in their flesh. When first seen by us, the final verdict of his doctor and the attendant specialist had been given the previous day as "Three days at most." That left us with two days in which to reorganise his treatment and habits: an impossible situation but for his immediate acceptance of suggestions and, later, his sustained cooperation. No patient has followed instructions with more intelligence and understanding. Here are the reports as received (1) from his local practitioner: He began to fail about a fortnight ago and last Wednesday he was unable to leave his bed. Thereafter he gradually got weaker and weaker. His end was peaceful with only slight discomfort. He was deeply appreciative of the twenty odd years of health and vigour which he had enjoyed from your treatment. I often thought that, being a childless widower, he was showing his gratitude by devoting so much of his time and energies during those borrowed years to the service of others.

and (2) from his brother who ends the history of that good, indeed beautiful life, in these words: My brother took to his bed on the Wednesday preceding his death (Monday, at 6 a.m.). I and my sister were summoned on the Saturday. He was aware that he was nearing his end, and was quite reconciled to it. He was conscious until very near the end. Apart from weakness, his passing was peaceful, so we have no regret on that score. This is as he would have wished.

And as we too would have wished. That final effect—an easy death—is in accordance with our teachings. A common experience

which alone should bring the profession up standing. Compare it with the death that patient was dying, years earlier under orthodox treatment. That was 21 years ago. Now " quite reconciled to it . . . his passing was peaceful." That Glasgow man, like Jack Williams of Tombstone, Arizona, " done his damndest." As a result the promised 2 days of agony grew into a happy, expansive life of 20 more years. Another chapter finished, and as William Blake well said: He who doubts from what he sees Will ne'er believe, do what you please.

KINGSTON LITERATURE RECOMMENDED FOR HOME STUDY. (Postages in brackets).

By James C. Thomson :— THE HEART. The Prevention and Cure of Cardiac Conditions (Thorsons). 5/- (4d.) " I think it is the most optimistic book I have read on any medical subject . . . I was so struck with it that half-way through I wrote to the publishers asking if I could be of any use in advertising it. . . ." —A. S. Neill.

TWO HEALTH PROBLEMS: CONSTIPATION AND OUR CIVILISATION (Thorsons). 7/6 (6d.) " The most fascinating book I have ever read. When my wife brought it home I picked it up and could not stop until I had finished it about 3 a.m. We are both keen on salads and exercise and I decided (against all my training; I teach hygiene) to give your ideas a trial. I cut out my daily three glasses of water and, as if by magic, from that minute my heartburn stopped. For five years it had never failed me after every meal. The school doctor prescribed a stomach powder but I had stopped that because, although it relieved the present discomfort, it always made the next bout worse. But best of all, by just stopping the water—nothing else—after about six weeks my twice weekly bowel action has come to be twice daily. A week or two ago I showed the book to an engineering friend who was visiting us, and he could not put it down. He tells me his indigestion stopped when he stopped his hot water every morning."

HIGH AND LOW BLOOD PRESSURE (Thorsons). Much useful advice and details of home treatment. ". . . a particularly good Appendix on 'What to Do.' "

5/- (4d.) —Tomorrow.

A NEW VIEWPOINT ON EPILEPSY: CAUSES AND CURES (Kingston). 1/- (2d.) " Full of priceless information. Those who are aware of the writer’s great experience and reputation, and who look for clear light on matters of personal health, will not be disappointed. . . . Not dealt with in the narrow fragmentary manner of the orthodox specialist, but with the broad view of the realistic whole man clearly illuminated. The result is revelation." —George Hicking.

APPENDICITIS (Thorsons).

l/6d. (3d.)

HEALTHY HAIR (Thorsons).

2/6d. (3d.)

NATURE CURE FOR THE BEGINNER (Kingston).

1/- (2d.)

BELFAST LECTURE (Kingston). l0d. (2d.) (Or for distribution, one dozen copies for 8/6., post free.) " The most simple and comprehensive explanation of Nature Cure I have ever listened to. I learned more in 90 minutes than I had done in nearly 30 years of reading and discussion."—One of the Audience.

PASTEURISED MILK: A NATIONAL MENACE (Kingston).

6d. (1d.)

" An unanswerable case against the manipulation of this valuable foodstuff. It should be read by every health seeker."

SMOKING: THE CASE AGAINST TOBACCO (Kingston). 7d. (l½d.) The Harm it Does to Young Persons and to the Injured. Its Place in the Causation of Many Serious Disease Conditions. DO MEDICINES CAUSE DISEASE? (Kingston).

1/- (2d.)

". . . should shock a grievously misinformed public into revolt against the legalised perpetuation of disease." —Edgar J. Saxon (Health and Life).

THE QUESTION OF V.D. (Kingston).

9d. (2d.)

" According to Bernard Shaw in his Everybody’s Political What's What, ' there is the gravest doubts as to whether the prescribed treatment of venereal disease is not mischievously mistaken.' Mr Thomson's startling booklet is a brilliant epitome of these doubts." —Bertram T. Fraser, M.A., B.Sc.

SLEEP FOR THE SLEEPLESS (Kingston).

1/- (2d.)

By Jessie R. Thomson:— HEALTHY CHILDHOOD.

7/6d. (6d.)

" Can be unreservedly recommended."—Daily Mail. " It should be read too by all prospective fathers."—Bertram T. Fraser, M.A., B.Sc. " The significance of the book lies in its commonsense and sincerity."—A. S. Neill.

YOUR HEALTH AND YOUR EMOTIONS.

6d. (1½d.)

By Jessie R. Thomson & J. Eva Thomson:— FOOD FOR HEALTH: The Kingston Recipes (Thorsons). Cloth, 4/- (3d.) Practical Nature Cure Recipes with Helpful Suggestions. By C. Leslie Thomson, B.Sc., Director of Studies, E.S.N.T.:— TO SEE AND TO HEAR (Thorsons). 5/- (4d.) The most up-to-date techniques for improving the sensitivity of these key senses. With many diagrams and full instructions for home treatment; exercises for improving the circulation to weak parts and useful advice on diet and breathing. ". . . an unbelievable improvement in my hearing in less than two months." —From a Midland Reader.

BREATHE HIGH, WIDE AND HANDSOME (Kingston). 1/- (2d.) POSTURE AND MOVEMENT. TOO MANY COOKS . . . AND TOO MUCH SALT.

6d. (1½d.) 1/- (2d.)

FLUORIDATION AND TOOTH HEALTH.

6d. (l½d.)

BUT IS IT NATURE CURE?

6d. (1½d.)

SOURED MILK (Kingston).

4d. (I½d.)

THE HEALING CRISIS (Kingston).

2d. (l½d.)

By Bertram T. Fraser, M.A., B.Sc:— WHAT TO EAT FOR HEALTH (Thorsons). 2/6d. (3d.) With Contributions by Mr and Mrs James C. Thomson. HOMEOPATHY, " BIOCHEMICS " & NATURE CURE (Kingston). 3d. (1½d.) By Bertram T. Fraser and C. Leslie Thomson:— HONEST BREAD AND THAT WHICH IS NOT (Thorsons). With excellent recipes for simple home baking.

3/6d. (4d.)

By Alec Milne:— RESPIRATORY DISTRESS.

6d. (l½d.)

RHEUMATISM—THE ACHE THAT AIDS.

6d. (l½d.)

•••••

SENSIBLE FOOD FOR ALL (Daniel), by Edgar J. Saxon.

7/6d. (4d.)

BANISH ILL-HEALTH (Daniel), by G. Phillips.

7/6d. (4d.)

HYDROTHERAPY (Thorsons), by Alex C. Barthels.

l/6d. (3d.)

DIGESTIVE TROUBLES (Thorsons), by Georgina Dewar. THE AMBULANCE DOWN IN THE VALLEY. (Nature Cure Song, Words and Music.)

2/- (3d.) 6d. (1½d.)

THE TAIT BEQUEST. 2d. (l½d.) The story of a grave injustice and legal discrimination against Nature Cure Patients. THE NATURE CURE BADGE. The Nature Cure symbol incorporated in an attractive brooch in enamel and silver or silverplate, ¾-inch square. Silver, £1, 1s.; Silverplate, 10/6d. Registered postage, 9d. Suitable for men or women. THE KINGSTON HEALTH CHRONICLE (Rude Health) our monthly magazine, gives many useful hints to the home-health seeker. For 8/6d. (or $1.50) you may enjoy Rude Health for one year.

KINGSTON CLINIC ILLUSTRATED BROCHURE. What we do and where we do it.

Gratis.

PROSPECTUS OF THE EDINBURGH SCHOOL OF NATURAL THERAPEUTICS. Gratis. Particulars of residential training in this progressive and satisfying new profession. (No correspondence courses.) All communications to The Secretary, Kingston Clinic, Edinburgh, 9. (Phone 79435).

KINGSTON "The Home of Modern Nature Cure" Kingston Clinic is situated within its own secluded and extensive grounds, just three miles from the sea, at an elevation of about 350 ft. Our winters are fairly mild and our summers not too hot, with clean, bracing air the whole year round. The average annual rainfall is only 21 inches, and William Christie—the wealthy merchant tailor who built the impressive main house in 1869—is said to have chosen this site, after years of search, as the sunniest spot anywhere near Edinburgh. To reach Kingston.—We are on the main road to Newcastle, half a mile distant from the Carlisle road and three miles south of the G.P.O. The Greenend terminus of No. 3 bus is at Kingston— twelve minutes from Princes Street. There is also a frequent service of buses from St. Andrew Square; all buses passing through Gilmerton stop at Kingston Main Gate on Gilmerton Road.

Printed by Mackenzie & Storrie, Ltd., 28-32 Coburg Street, Leith.