A To Z German New Medicine
The medical community stands largely united against a controversial and dangerous pseudoscientific belief system known as German New Medicine (GNM), or Germanische Heilkunde. This system, originating with the late Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer, posits that all diseases are the result of specific, identifiable emotional conflicts and can be cured by resolving those conflicts.
This concept, while appealing to some seeking alternative approaches to health, lacks scientific validation and has been widely discredited. Patients who embrace GNM often reject conventional medical treatments, leading to potentially devastating health consequences and even death.
The Core Tenets of German New Medicine
At its core, GNM proposes five "biological laws" that govern the onset, progression, and supposed resolution of all diseases. According to Hamer's theory, every disease originates from a Dirk Hamer Syndrome (DHS), a sudden, unexpected, and isolating conflict shock.
These shocks supposedly impact specific areas of the brain, manifesting as "Hamer foci" visible on brain scans. The location of the Hamer focus dictates which organ is affected and the type of disease that develops.
GNM divides diseases into two phases: an active phase, where the conflict is unresolved and symptoms worsen, and a healing phase, where the conflict is resolved and the body repairs itself. During the healing phase, GNM proponents claim that symptoms such as fever, inflammation, and pain are positive signs of recovery, despite conventional medicine viewing them as potential dangers.
The Five Biological Laws
The first biological law states that all diseases originate from a DHS. The second law describes the two phases of disease. The third law relates to the ontogenetic system of tumors. The fourth law connects microbes to the healing process, suggesting they work under the direction of the brain. The fifth law asserts that disease is not a mistake of nature but a meaningful biological program.
Lack of Scientific Validation and Condemnation
The scientific community has overwhelmingly rejected GNM due to its lack of empirical evidence and its reliance on anecdotal claims. No reputable scientific studies have validated Hamer's five biological laws or the existence of Hamer foci.
Organizations like the American Cancer Society and the German Cancer Society have issued strong warnings against GNM. These organizations emphasize that GNM's claims are unsubstantiated and that patients who rely on it risk delaying or foregoing effective medical care.
"Available evidence does not support the claim that cancer is caused by emotional conflicts. Patients should not rely on unproven methods such as German New Medicine but should seek treatment from qualified medical professionals." - American Cancer Society
The Dangers of Rejecting Conventional Medicine
The most significant danger associated with GNM is the rejection of conventional medical treatments. Patients who believe in GNM may refuse surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, or other proven therapies in favor of resolving their perceived emotional conflicts.
This can have devastating consequences, leading to disease progression, unnecessary suffering, and ultimately, death. There have been numerous documented cases of individuals who died after choosing GNM over conventional cancer treatments.
The case of Olivia Pilhar, an Austrian girl with cancer whose parents chose GNM over conventional treatment, brought international attention to the dangers of this approach. While Olivia eventually received conventional treatment, the delay significantly complicated her case.
Ethical Concerns and Legal Ramifications
The promotion and practice of GNM raise serious ethical concerns. Medical professionals have a duty to provide evidence-based care and to protect patients from harm.
Promoting GNM, especially to vulnerable individuals facing serious illnesses, violates this ethical duty. In several countries, individuals promoting or practicing GNM have faced legal consequences, including charges of fraud and manslaughter.
Dr. Hamer himself faced legal troubles throughout his career, including imprisonment in several countries. These convictions were often related to the harm caused by his medical practices.
The Appeal of Alternative Medicine and the Role of Critical Thinking
Despite the lack of scientific evidence and the documented dangers, GNM continues to attract some individuals seeking alternative approaches to health. This can be attributed to various factors, including distrust of conventional medicine, a desire for simple explanations for complex illnesses, and the allure of personalized healing.
The internet and social media have also played a role in spreading GNM, allowing proponents to share anecdotal accounts and disseminate misinformation. It is crucial to foster critical thinking skills and to encourage individuals to evaluate health information carefully, relying on reputable sources and consulting with qualified medical professionals.
The responsibility falls on educators, healthcare providers, and journalists to debunk misinformation and promote evidence-based healthcare. Public awareness campaigns can educate individuals about the dangers of GNM and other unproven medical treatments.
Looking Ahead: Combating Misinformation and Protecting Patients
Combating the spread of GNM and other pseudoscientific health practices requires a multi-faceted approach. This includes rigorous scientific research to understand the psychological factors that contribute to the appeal of alternative medicine.
It also involves effective communication strategies to disseminate accurate information and counter misinformation. Strengthening regulations regarding the promotion and practice of unproven medical treatments is essential to protect vulnerable patients.
Ultimately, ensuring that individuals have access to evidence-based healthcare and are empowered to make informed decisions about their health is the most effective way to safeguard them from the dangers of GNM. Continued vigilance and a commitment to scientific rigor are crucial in protecting public health.
