"When former airline pilot Tony Royle came to see me last year to seek reassurance that it was OK to participate in an Ironman event, having stopped all his medications 18 months after suffering a heart attack, I was initially a little alarmed.

But after talking to him, I realised he had made an informed decision to stop the medication after suffering side effects, and instead had opted for a diet and lifestyle approach to manage his heart disease.

His case is a great example of how evidence-based medicine should be practiced. This is the integration of clinical expertise, the best available evidence and – most importantly – taking patients’ preferences and values into consideration.

But our healthcare system has failed to keep to this gold standard of clinical practice for the most important goal of improving patient health outcomes. The consequences have been devastating."

An article in the CDC says:
"Modern medicine, through over-prescription, represents a major threat to public health. Peter Gøtzsche, the co-founder of the reputed Cochrane Collaboration, estimates that prescribed medication is the third most common cause of death globally after heart disease and cancer.
A general practitioner recently writing in the BMJ, said that evidence-based medicine is polluted with “fraud, sham diagnosis, short-term data, poor regulation, surrogate ends, questionnaires that can’t be validated, and statistically significant but clinically irrelevant outcomes”, all leading to “over diagnosis and misery”.

In more temperate tones, Goldberger and Buxton recently suggested in a JAMA Viewpoint article that:

"Personalized medicine and guideline-based medicine “present conflicting priorities”, with evidence-based guidelines derived from clinical trial data failing to recognize the heterogeneity of the patient population to which they will be applied. The existence of these guidelines then acts, they say, as a barrier to the development of personalized approaches that would be more appropriate for different population subgroups – including those likely to gain no benefit from the intervention."

The two most prestigious journals of medicine in the world are The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine. Richard Horton, editor in chief of The Lancet said this in 2015:

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half may simply be untrue”

Dr Marcia Angell, former editor in chief of NEJM wrote in 2009 that,

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor”

Evidence-based medicine is broken

is the heading in an article written by a General practitioner Dr Des Spence in the British Medical Journal. He goes on to say:
"Evidence-based medicine (EBM) wrong-footed the drug industry for a while in the 1990s. We could fend off the army of pharmaceutical representatives because often their promotional material was devoid of evidence. But the drug industry came to realise that EBM was an opportunity rather than a threat. Research, especially when published in a prestigious journal, was worth more than thousands of sales representatives. Today EBM is a loaded gun at clinicians’ heads. “You better do as the evidence says,” it hisses, leaving no room for discretion or judgment. EBM is now the problem, fuelling over diagnosis and overtreatment.

You see, without so-called “evidence” there is no seat at the guideline table. This is the fundamental “commissioning bias,” the elephant in the room, because of the drug industry controls and funds most research. So the drug industry and EBM have set about legitimising illegitimate diagnoses and then widening drug indications, and now doctors can prescribe a pill for every ill. The billion prescriptions a year in England in 2012, up 66% in one decade, do not reflect a true increased burden of illness nor an aging population, just polypharmacy supposedly based on evidence. The drug industry’s corporate mission is to make us all sick however well we feel. As for EBM screening programmes, these are the combine harvester of wellbeing, producing bails of over diagnosis and misery."

Some of us were made aware of all this by the great Eustace Mullins in his classic "Murder by injection" who tells us about the whole conspiracy to defraud people and governments. This is a must-read for anyone who wants to better protect him or herself.

Retired heart surgeon Dr Donald Miller, Jr. explained what Evidence-Based Medicine is and how it has slithered its way into health care in America in an important article called Modern "Medicine at the Crossroads" that was published in The Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons in the Fall of 2015. Here are some important excerpts:

"Doctors in academic medical centres write practice guidelines. They base them on clinical trials that randomize populations of patients with a given condition into treatment and placebo groups and choose treatments that are statistically shown to work best. According to the tenets of evidence-based medicine (EBM), epidemiological and biostatistical ways of thinking provide what its proponents consider “best evidence.”
An example of further deterioration is the medicine Lyrica (pregabalin). "It is one of the world's best-selling drugs—but its success is as much to do with bad science and unfounded claims of medical researchers".

Researchers at McGill University in Canada looked at the ways hype has been built up about Lyrica.

They discovered that doctors were prescribing the drug for conditions for which there was little or no evidence that it could help. In one example, the researchers found that the drug has been prescribed for more than a decade as a treatment for low back pain—but there haven't been any large rigorous trials that prove its effectiveness.

Surprisingly, these unfounded claims haven't been driven by the manufacturer—at least not directly—but instead by researchers who have been awarded funds by government agencies or their own medical centres.

As a result, clinical trials are doing the very reverse of what they are supposed to do: they are designed to alert doctors and patients to ineffective and costly treatments when instead they are promoting them, the researchers say."

(Source: JAMA Internal Medicine, 2018; doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.5705)


EBM downgrades traditional forms of medical evidence, notably a doctor’s clinical experience and understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms of disease, both unquantifiable.

Evidence-based medicine applies the principles of epidemiology to individual patient care, basing that care on statistical trials. Probing EBM, co-author Clifford Miller concludes, “EBM has failed in the real world of medicine, in terms of its use in making medical decisions and in proving causality."

Practitioners are tightly controlled. A medical doctor dare does not venture outside his strictly controlled remit.

A dentist dare not investigate illnesses, which are traditionally attended to by doctors even if the evidence clearly shows, as shown on this website under numerous articles, that only dental interventions will help alleviate the symptoms of the patient.

An alternative practitioner may not step out of his line.

The governing bodies have been set up to erase them from the register for the slightest infractions and destroy their livelihoods. Whole armies of lawyers appear to be working for these organisations.

The controlling bodies are policing organisations devoted to evidence-based medicine with none of the open-mindedness needed for the clinical practice of complex cases which our practice is submerged with.

As noted earlier all along in this article the evidence-based medicine is a ruse to mislead and defraud. This website attempts to inform the public of what really is the cause of illness. The testimonials from patients are the least bit of evidence I can provide with my limited resources in terms of manpower and finances.

Practising global care, encompassing the effects of the asymmetry of the skeletal system on systemic health is the only way to treat patients.

Setting up evidence-based trials appears derisory. We have been doing it forever. All it has produced is widespread chronic illness and drugs some at extortionate costs, which have never cured any patients but regularly cause serious adverse effects needing even more drugs leading to unworkable polypharmacy with no end in sight.

We need a multidisciplinary approach or a Functional Medicine approach to care for the sick. None of which our professional bodies are designed to tolerate as it affects the cosy relationships and revolving door appointments between the governing bodies and commercial interests.

I have been advised that the easiest way is to "hide those amazing articles online" and live off my unparalleled successes and have USB keys with my info for the patients I trust. Why should I?

I am in here for the wider audience - the thousands of victims of fraudulent practices who have been left destitute by EBM practices.