New German Medicine and Total Biology – can you think yourself better?

So many methods of self-discovery suggest the route involves resolving psychological conflicts that you have. Not all. Buddhism based thinking, for example, is more about initially observing the conflict rather than trying to resolve it.

When you observe, they say, you disassociate yourself from it which gives you the opportunity to see it from a different point of view. Something that you felt was stressful, for example, becomes something that energizers.

I’ve written a great deal about this already so I won’t repeat it but it is worth a short reminder that not all journeys of self-discovery focus on conflict revolution.

It does, however, feature highly on the list for some and so it is often in my internet searches. It was in this way that I stumbled across German New Medicine (GNM) or, as it is more often referred to in the French speaking world – Total Biology.

This school of thought goes like this: If you are ill it is your body telling you that you have a psychological conflict that needs to be resolved.

It is very detailed as to which ailments represent which conflicts. If you have got a rash on the inside of your arm, for example, it is because you fear someone might leave you. If you have cancer it is because you have an overly strong fear of dying. Resolve these issues and your illness will disappear.

The idea popped into the head of a certain Ryke Hamer, a qualified medical practitioner until 1986 when his licence was revoked after a six year old girl nearly died.

Her parents had followed his advice that their daughters cancer would be cured if she found and resolved the psychological conflict causing it but her condition deteriorated.

Since then he has served time in prison and been found to have been responsible for ‘several tens of preventable deaths’.

Most healing methods, it has to be said, don’t have a 100% success rate but that doesn’t make them invalid and of course there are plenty that argue the big pharma’s lurked in the dark when Hamer was stripped of his licence. If he is right that’s not could news for the multi-billion dollar industry.

It was for this reason that I felt I should probe a little more deeply. After all there are a number of practitioners around the world who follow his technique despite his track record in the courts and despite the fact that no academic institute that has been presented with his work is prepared to endorse it.

So anyway, once Hamer had the idea he went back and looked through the brain scans of 6,000 of his patients and claimed he found signs of the psychological conflicts that were causing their physical illnesses were visible on the scans.

He would later claim these 6,000 cases which would help prove his point had been confiscated by the Austrian police in a raid on his house although no records or witnesses exist of this event.

He presented this work to a couple of universities who both claimed his research was too faulty for any proper conclusions to be drawn. Failing to get support from traditional routes Hamer started publishing books on his theories and these have slowly caught on but it has to be said mainly only in the German and French speaking worlds.

Owner of the theory goes off the rails

One of the stoppers that GNM or Total Biology has faced is that Hamer seems to have gone a bit off the rails. He claims Jews use his system and that is why none of them die of cancer while Jewish doctors don’t recommend his system to non Jews as part of their system to kill off anyone who doesn’t believe in their faith.

More over Hamer claims injections used in traditional cancer treatment contain poisonous capsules that the Jewish state can activate by satellite ‘when the time comes’.

That does all seem a bit far fetched considering cancer only affects a very small percentage of society so its a pretty complex system for achieving genocide of the non Jewish global population.

It then becomes quite easy to say that if Hamer is a bit of a fruit cake in this regard his German New Medicine system is probably a bit fruit cake as well.

But I’m going to give it the very wide benefit of the doubt at the moment. I mean if you had discovered a cure to every known ailment in the world that didn’t involve the need to take any drugs and you had been shunned by society at large you might well go off the rails in some regards.

The grain of truth

Almost all systems out there start with a grain of truth. Its the bit which says ‘that has been proved beyond doubt therefore this must be true as well’.

GNM is all about how the brain causes illnesses and there are certain ailments where traditional medicine has come to this conclusion – such as eczema or psoriasis.

GNM then makes the leap to say that actually all illnesses, Cancer included, are caused by the brain and the brain can resolve them without medication being required. If true it would revolutionise medicine and bankrupt quite a few pharmaceutical companies so lets dig more.

Does it work?

Where I struggle to buy into GNM is in two parts.

Firstly it is very vague. We have all had moments in our life where we fear dying or contemplate our own mortality. According to Hamer that is what prompts cancer. However not everyone who has had those thoughts gets cancer.

The catch all here is that those who did not get cancer didn’t have a moment where they feared death enough. Their psychological trauma was not strong enough to cause cancer.

Secondly GNM states you can cure your own cancer by just resolving your fear of death issue. So what about cancer sufferers who tried GNM but died from cancer. Very simple in Hamer’s thinking, they didn’t really resolve the conflict.

So GNM covers itself in a ‘100%’ correct veil through keeping things vague.

I was, for example, in a car accident 20 years ago and it really bought home to me how close I was to dying. I didn’t get cancer. GMT thinking says that is for two reasons:

• If I ever get cancer in the future it will be because of that trauma
• If I never get cancer then that trauma wasn’t strong enough

Job done – it can’t get it wrong and so it is easy to claim at the diagnoses point that GNM is always 100% correct.

So if I did get cancer because of my car accident trauma I can get rid of it by resolving that trauma. If I die of cancer later its because I didn’t resolve the psychological conflict. My fault, not GNM s

Again it ensures GNM is 100% covered and 100% correct. In this respect it is a bit like religion. If I believe in God and my cancer recedes it is a miracle passed down by Him. If I die it is all part of His plan. With both outcomes explained religion is also plugging every hole and GNM does that to.

So where is the real proof?

First I need to point out an important distinction. I do believe there are many natural remedies out there that could be proved to help with certain ailments. The trouble is being natural they cannot be patented and so don’t attract the cash needed for the research. It is the blight in the way modern medicine works.

My question is ‘Can it be proved if you put the money there for proper research?’

I’m not talking about the various testimonials on the web of which there are plenty because GNM or Total Biology are systems that are quite easy to ‘make work’

I have a rash on my arm that comes and goes in intensity. According to GNM this is because I have a fear of someone leaving me. The physical illness is just my body’s way of calling attention to an internal conflict that needs to be resolved.

We have all had a fear of someone leaving them. If I tried really hard I could remember something like a really good night out with friends that I did not want to end, a holiday that I did not want to come back from (i.e. leaving the hotel staff), etc. etc.

So just like a vague horoscope I can make it fit if I want to and there is plenty of anecdotal evidence on the net of people who have done just that.

If you have a rash on your arm and you can’t think of such an occasion – well – you are just blocking it or if you give yourself enough time you will remember a situation that foots the bill even if it is tenuous in many respects.

 

Proving GNM without Hamer

Theoretically though we don’t need the mysterious 6,000 case studies. The methodology is out there so it can be tested. Why doesn’t anyone?

Well the clever thing about GNM and Total Biology is they make it impossible to prove in the same way that religion does. Let me demonstrate how it ‘Can’t be tested’ at every turn.

The first step in GNM is a brain scan which shows ‘Hamer foci’, rings in the brain. These represent the psychological conflict that needs to be resolved.

So why not give a GNM practitioner 1,000 brain scans, 500 of which are from healthy patients and 500 from patients suffering a particular ailment? They could then prove they know which are the healthy patients and, for the ill people, what ailments they are suffering from.

Not so easy. In GNM it is possible for the patient to still have physical signs of the ailment even when the conflict is resolved. This is the healing phase. The time the physical signs take to heal is kind of open ended so it is possible for someone to be suffering an ailment but not have rings in the brain.

As such, according to GNM, on one hand the brain scans are proof and on the other hand they can’t be used to prove anything unless you can, for each of the patients, ascertain if their psychological conflict has been resolved at the time that the scan was taken.

As some patients may not believe they have a psychological conflict (because, GNM would argue, they are blocking it or can’t remember it) that makes brain scan checking a duff method for testing.

So why not a double-blind test trial where some patients are given traditional medication and some use GNM methods. Again virtually impossible because in a double-blind test the medical practitioners cannot know who is receiving which treatment and obviously the difference between tablets and injections versus psychotherapy is a little easy to spot.

Even if you were to have a crack at it and GNM were to fail horribly to show any signs that it actually worked this could just be put down to a set of people who did not fully resolve their psychological conflict.

As I mentioned it is never the method that is at fault, only the patient.

GNM, Total Biology and Religion

To me GNM and Total Biology are actually more akin to Religion than to any alternative medication. Every day people get ill and then get better.

• If they used GNM they could attribute it to that.
• If they believed in a god they could attribute it to that.
• If they took some mainstream medication they might thank that.

Sometimes people don’t get better, in some cases they die. In GNM this means they weren’t able to resolve the internal conflict, in religion it is because they did not ‘believe’ enough in their deity or because “it is all part of God’s plan”.

In both cases the fault was with the patient, the system itself is error free.

Compared to them modern medicine is flawed. Those who release drugs onto the market must openly admit to what extent they are effective – e.g. this drug is effective in 60% of cases.

So, using the 60% example purely to demonstrate a point, modern medicine is only 60% effective and fails the patient 40% of the time. GNM or religion is 100% effective, it just fails 90% of the time because the patient failed to use it correctly or believe in it.

60%, 40%, 90% are just arbitrary figures to show the problem here. The truth is no one knows how often GNM fails because, as I’ve mentioned, it is like a slippery fish – hard to measure.

GNM and Total Biology

One other particular reason GNM and Total Biology don’t seem that bothered about proving themselves is because they are turning into a lucrative industry anyway.

But like with all methods that just require you to ‘believe’ I don’t buy into it.

 

People pay hard cash to religions and will travel thousands of miles on pilgrimages in the hope of miracles which cure them even though there is absolutely no proof such approaches work.

GNM and Total Biology match that religious approach to life far more than being part of complementary or alternative medicine.