Clinical studies in the peer reviewed journals questonable

[Guest guest]

From: newsletter@...(Jon Barron) Subject: Baseline of Health

Bi-Monthly Newsletter August 2009

 Written by: Jon Barron 

Edited by: Barron 

Clinical studies in the peer reviewed journals of the medical community

are clearly limited. With questionable treatments and medicines

regularly passing the peer review process, I think we can safely say the

system is flawed. In this issue of the newsletter, Jon explores what's

wrong with the system and how it costs you vast amounts of money -- not

to mention significant chunks of your health.

by Jon Barron

Once again, the news forces me to return to one of my favorite topics --

the limitations of medical studies and peer reviewed journals. Let me be

absolutely clear here. Unlike many in the alternative health community,

I am not anti allopathic-medicine. As I frequently remind people, after

an automobile accident, you want a medical doctor, not an herbalist.

There are things medical doctors can do that no alternative healer can

replace. However!!! That said, as much as they would like to believe the

contrary, medical doctors and modern medicine are not perfect. They do

not hold an " exclusive " when it comes to providing the best option for

treating all illness and disease.

But more to the point, the peer reviewed journals of the medical

community are not the be-all and end-all when it comes to identifying

which treatments work, and which ones don't.

To learn about the $1.5 trillion dollars in mistakes that you've been

paying for, check out:

http://www.jonbarron.org/baseline-health-program/2009-08-17.php