>>24603484

we in here

>>24603484

Q1081

Q!xowAT4Z3VQ 04/08/2018 12:09:57 ID: e23926

8chan/qresearch: 951358

Anonymous 04/08/2018 11:29:24 ID:446509

8chan/qresearch: 950959

>>950925

Putin is Russias President.

His job is to look after the Russian people.

Put yourself in his shoes.

He wants to win why not take advantage of his enemies.

Trump comes along.

Russia/Putin becomes our Ally

Xi becomes our Ally

Xi and Putin are also underattack by the deepstate which is rooted Globally

>>950959

POTUS NEVER telegraphs his moves.

Think logically.

Why did POTUS announce his intention to pull out of Syria?

Moves and countermoves.

These people are STUPID (& SICK).

Q

>>24603839

ty

>>24603858

are we in the YMCA?

fuck….

The White House / @WhiteHouse 05/14/2026 08:00:50

ID: Not Available

Truth Social: 116572818663342967

Image Name: 37064c9e4d67cb8b.jpeg

Filename: 37064c9e4d67cb8b.jpeg

Image Search Tags:

History in motion. 🇺🇸🇨🇳

The White House / @WhiteHouse 05/14/2026 05:53:40

ID: Not Available

Truth Social: 116572318622486352

Image Name: 41299eeede222982.jpeg

Filename: 41299eeede222982.jpeg

Image Search Tags:

Both countries agreed that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.

>>24603948

filturd

>>24603963

DMSO Heals the Lungs and Cures Chronic Respiratory Diseases

How DMSO treats Asthma, COPD, Pneumonia, ARDS and Pulmonary Fibrosis

A Midwestern Doctor

Jul 06, 2025

To some extent, this is to be expected, as, like many businesses, medicine revolves around recurring sales, and COPD is one of its core markets (as COPD patients are on medications for life and often need more of them as the disease progresses). This in turn, helps to explain why chronic diseases of the respiratory tract are the fourth most common cause of death in the United States, and in the United States alone, 24 billion dollars was spent on COPD in 2023. In short, this is not a market that the medical industry will ever willingly relinquish, regardless of the suffering that is created.

Note: pneumonia and COPD are two of the most common reasons for hospital admissions. Asthma is in a similar situation, as while not fatal or anywhere as likely to send one to the hospital (admissions for asthma exacerbations are around 0.7% of hospital admissions), it requires the chronic consumption of similar medications, makes over 40 billion a year (and increasing at 4.4% annually), is a frequent source of hospital admissions (for asthma exacerbations), and despite all the money that’s been poured into it, asthma rates keep going up (e.g., in 1999 9.1% of Americans had ever been diagnosed with asthma whereas in 2022 44.2 million Americans had).

Umbrella Remedies

In medicine, there are a few therapies (e.g., ultraviolet blood irradiation) that have the ability to cure a wide range of diseases, and as such are referred to as “umbrella therapies.” This is because, amongst other things, they address the root causes of many illnesses such as poor circulation throughout the body, inflammation, and cells entering a state of shock where they stop functioning and eventually die.

DMSO, in turn, has repeatedly been shown to be remarkably effective for a wide range of disorders including:

Strokes, paralysis, a wide range of neurological disorders (e.g., Down Syndrome and dementia), and many circulatory disorders (e.g., Raynaud’s, varicose veins, hemorrhoids), which I discussed here.

A wide range of tissue injuries, such as sprains, concussions, burns, surgical incisions, and spinal cord injuries (discussed here).

Chronic pain (e.g., from a bad disc, bursitis, arthritis, or complex regional pain syndrome), which I discussed here.

A wide range of autoimmune, protein, and contractile disorders, such as scleroderma, amyloidosis, and interstitial cystitis (discussed here).

A variety of head conditions, such as tinnitus, vision loss, dental problems, and sinusitis (discussed here).

A wide range of internal organ diseases, such as pancreatitis, infertility, liver cirrhosis, and endometriosis (discussed here).

A wide range of skin conditions, such as burns, varicose veins, acne, hair loss, ulcers, skin cancer, and many autoimmune dermatologic diseases (discussed here).

Many challenging infectious conditions, including chronic bacterial infections, herpes, and shingles (discussed here).

Many aspects of cancer (e.g., many of cancer’s debilitating symptoms, making cancer treatments more potent, greatly reducing the toxicity of conventional therapies, and turning cancer cells back into normal cells), which I discussed here.

Note: most of the above have also been shown for ultraviolet blood irradiation. Likewise, similar data exists for ozone, another umbrella remedy that I plan to focus on once the DMSO series is finished.

Additionally, DMSO possesses a unique ability to enhance the absorption of medications and natural therapies by facilitating their passage into the body. This property has transformed the way conventional and natural medicine is practiced, opening up nearly limitless possibilities for incredible therapeutic combinations (discussed here), and most importantly, DMSO is extremely safe (provided it's used correctly).

As such, a wealth of data (detailed in the above articles) has accumulated, showing DMSO has a high rate of efficacy in a wide range of conditions. Since DMSO was widely available, it quickly spread like wildfire across America in the 1960s (particularly due to how rapidly it alleviated “incurable” pain). Regrettably, the FDA then stepped in and went to war with DMSO to protect the status quo. In the decades that followed, despite the public, the scientific community, and Congress petitioning the FDA to rescind their prohibition on DMSO, it all fell on deaf ears.

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dmso-heals-the-lungs-and-cures-chronic-35a

>>24603981

DMSO Heals the Lungs and Cures Chronic Respiratory Diseases

How DMSO treats Asthma, COPD, Pneumonia, ARDS and Pulmonary Fibrosis

A Midwestern Doctor

Jul 06, 2025

Story at a Glance:

•Chronic respiratory diseases, while quite profitable, remain an area that medicine struggles with, and as such many with them are subjected to a life of healthcare expenses, impaired stamina, and in many cases, a painful decline until they succumb to the illness.

•DMSO is an “umbrella remedy” capable of treating a wide range of challenging ailments due to its combination of therapeutic properties (e.g., reducing inflammation, improving circulation, and reviving dying cells).

•Many of these properties (e.g., reducing fibrosis and inflammation, restoring damaged organs, improving circulation) are uniquely suited to address the underlying causes of chronic respiratory diseases.

•DMSO is also quite useful for addressing the infections that frequently accompany these disorders, as it has antimicrobial activity, reduces damaging lung inflammation, and potentiates many antimicrobial therapies (e.g., many untreatable resistant respiratory infections rapidly respond to DMSO mixed with an antibiotic and many individuals have cured a chronic illness by combining DMSO with a natural antimicrobial).

•A large volume of published data and many user reports show that DMSO often produces remarkable results for a wide range of respiratory disorders, of which asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and pulmonary fibrosis, pneumonia) will be covered here.

• This article will review the data demonstrating DMSO’s efficacy for lung diseases, along with an examination of the most common protocols used for them and other natural approaches that also aid in their treatment (e.g., for asthma, COPD, and pulmonary fibrosis). It will also provide guidelines for general DMSO procurement and use.

Since childhood, I have known numerous smokers who had slow agonizing deaths from COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), which were often quite traumatic for their family and friends, particularly as they became increasingly disabled from their loss of respiratory function.

Once I entered medicine, I saw the other half of this and lost count of how many COPD patients were subjected to the same medical protocols (which they often could not refuse as people will do anything to be able to not suffocate), and then be hospitalized either for a COPD exacerbation or pneumonia (a common COPD complication) making them unable to breathe, and before long enter a cycle of ever more frequent repeat hospitalizations until they die.

Note: steroids are frequently used to manage COPD and slow the destruction of the lungs. Steroids have a variety of side effects, including suppressing the immune system, which coupled with the reduced respiratory turnover seen in COPD (which reduces their ability to clear bacteria from the airway), makes them much more vulnerable to pneumonia.

>>24603984

>>24603986

I deemed you worthless and blocked you already

kek

>>24604014

hi baker, are you baking?

or do i have time to post 10 huge posts on dmso?

ty

>>24604050

will do

o7

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Why Medicine Won't Cure You (and What's Finally Changing)

The predatory business model that requires lifelong patients faces its first federal challenge with Kennedy's historic SSRI initiative

A Midwestern Doctor

May 11, 2026

Story at a Glance:

No industry, organization, or cause tasked with solving a problem will actually solve it, because the problem disappearing threatens their economic livelihood or political power—a dynamic visible everywhere from non-profits which constantly seek donations but never produce results to dating apps that deliberately prevent users from finding partners and leaving the platform.

The pharmaceutical industry has perfected this model: drugs are designed to be taken perpetually rather than cure, side effects create demand for additional drugs, and the entire regulatory apparatus is structured to protect this status quo by suppressing affordable natural therapies like DMSO that challenge it.

SSRIs epitomize this dynamic—massively overprescribed, frequently life-ruining, and nearly impossible to withdraw from—yet for decades, the industry successfully kept all criticism of them out of mainstream discourse.

Recently, efforts to connect SSRIs to mass shootings shifted the Overton window, making SSRI injuries gradually become acceptable to discuss, culminating in Secretary Kennedy recently holding a panel where victims shared devastating testimonies of what SSRIs had done to their lives.

Kennedy then announced a multiagency federal effort to combat inappropriate SSRI prescribing, train providers in how to correctly taper patients off antidepressants, and provide non-pharmaceutical alternatives—marking the first time in memory a federal health initiative has aimed to help get patients off a major drug class rather than on one.

Conversely, those who embrace the constant challenge of actually solving problems rather than managing them—in medicine and elsewhere—consistently find it is the most fulfilling way to practice, which is why Kennedy's approach of giving physicians a supportive framework to break from the status quo holds so much promise.

When I was in high school, I observed a few discouraging events which led me to postulate: “no industry, organization or cause tasked with solving a problem will actually solve it because the problem disappearing threatens their economic livelihood or political power.” Since that time, I have observed more examples than I can count in so many different spheres that I’ve accepted this dynamic is a common feature of society, and likewise, have come across many similar observations by others, my favorite of which was:

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program—Milton Friedman

Recently two noteworthy examples of this principle came to my attention.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

First, a frustrated patient shared with me they’d recently learned all of the online dating apps had switched from formats which allowed people to find suitable long term partners (e.g., with lengthy compatibility surveys) to ones which prevented people from matching because if someone found a good match on a platform, they would then stop paying more money for the service, whereas if they were hooked on it and spending hours each day trying to find someone, they would be a sustainable source of revenue. More remarkably, once one company figured out this approach made more money, they bought out all of their competitors (sometimes with threats of spurious lawsuits) and shifted them all over to this predatory model as well (all of which is detailed in these six articles1,2,3,4,5,6). I found this example noteworthy as:

One of the greatest sources of distress I find in patients (particularly now) are relationship challenges, particularly a lack of one, and I believe much of this traces back to apps taking over courtship.

Beyond the personal cost this dynamic creates, one of the largest challenges most developed countries are facing is a low birthrate which is primarily due to low marriage rates. My belief, in turn, is that many of the heavily contested policies we are seeing (e.g., reducing social support for the elderly, mass migration, or replacing workers with robots or AI) ultimately are due to the fact policy makers believe the declining birthrate means it will not be viable for the younger generation to support the society (particularly the elderly) so alternatives need to be found regardless of how objectionable they are.

A common cycle predatory industries in America follow is presenting a “superior” way to meet an essential need of humanity that replaces the traditional one that’s worked, then once the old one is completely displaced, tightening the screws with the new one (to milk as much out of the population as possible) until things are far worse than what preceded it and massive social cost is accrued (e.g., the Rockefellers did this in various ways with food, energy, and medicine).

Note: because online dating has now become so bad, the companies that monopolized the market are starting to lose a lot of users and money, signaling there may be a chance for this cycle to reset itself.

Second, a federal DOJ indictment recently charged the SPLC (one of the country’s leading civil rights groups that built its reputation fighting hate) with wire fraud, bank fraud, and money laundering. Prosecutors alleged it paid over $3 million in donor funds to informants embedded in white supremacist groups (including the KKK and National Alliance) while soliciting donations to “end hate,” and that one paid informant participated in planning chats, attended, and helped with logistics for the 2017 Charlottesville Unite the Right rally. Many, in turn, were outraged about this, in part because of how much political capital was extracted from the event (e.g., Biden made opposing it a central justification for his 2020 presidential campaign and Harris to a lesser extent did so as well in 2024) but also because of just how much money it made:

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Unfortunately, these are far from isolated examples, and it would be impossible for me to cover even a sliver of them here. As such, this article will focus on how this principle applies to medicine and why I believe beyond greed, complacency also plays a central role in the continual recurrence of this dynamic across societies.

Is Money The Root Of All Evil?

The origins of our faith and devotion to money have raised many questions throughout the ages. The love of money, in turn, has long been recognized as one of the most powerful forces for twisting human hearts towards evil (which often results in immense destruction to the people or the environment), while simultaneously, its value is often completely arbitrary—money gets printed and then assumes value because everyone holds a collective faith in it the ruling class controls us through. At the same time, money is a remarkable force for both developing and organizing society, and many of the things we depend upon are only available to us because of the economic system we live within.

When the question of money is looked at, it is often seen through a lens of greed being a deadly sin. However, I would argue the core issue is that for many people, effectively accumulating money becomes the foundational axiom (guiding principle) used to navigate life, causing them to rationalize a variety of unethical positions (they often lie about) to make money, because their internal algorithm will frequently default to the choice that acquires more money. Recognizing this, in turn, provides an invaluable tool for understanding the world around you, as the motivations of others often become far clearer once you cut through all their rhetoric and view things strictly through what they stand to profit from.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Algorithms of Business

In the same way that a default behavior to seek the most profitable choice helps to explain many of the individual actions we observe around us, businesses also follow a relatively predictable set of behaviors aimed at optimizing profit, which you can see in a wide range of industries.

In general, most large businesses aim for the following, prioritizing whichever are most feasible:

Continual growth

High markups on their product

The widest possible market

Market exclusivity (to protect and maximize sales)

Repeating sales far into the future

The main problem with this framework, which society largely applauds and equates with success, is that businesses routinely prioritize profit, even when it conflicts with the interests of customers or society. Because of this, we frequently see:

Artificial “needs” being created through marketing, making unnecessary products seem essential.

Harmful products (environmentally damaging or toxic to humans) being aggressively marketed and kept on the market despite the damage.

Extreme markups on essential products, pushing dependent customers closer to poverty.

Monopolies and exclusivity tactics used to block competing (and often better) solutions from entering the market.

Products deliberately designed for repeat purchases rather than full solutions, such as planned obsolescence or proprietary consumables (e.g., Gillette’s classic “razor-and-blades” sales model, and its modern equivalents like Amazon’s sinus irrigator that only works with its expensive proprietary pods that you quickly run out of).

The pharmaceutical industry, not surprisingly, excels in all of these, which helps to explain why they have managed to sustain steady growth for decades, and why one-fifth of all money spent in the United States goes to healthcare despite our country receiving very poor returns on that investment.

Note: annual adult vaccines (which frequently do nothing. particularly because they are often for the wrong strain) are an excellent example of an unsafe, unproven and ineffective product that is pushed on everyone because it fulfills the need for perpetually recurring sales.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Lifelong Patients

A frequently shared meme highlights that members of the medical community frequently face the same dilemma dating companies do.

The more time I’ve spent in medicine, the more I’ve come to appreciate that many principles you see in business are not only replicated in medicine but inevitably will guide medical practice. For example, much of modern medicine is only possible because it has successfully made the case it represents the “pinnacle of science” and that medical services are both essential and deserve a premium price far exceeding what anyone else has paid historically (which allows immense amounts of American money to be invested into creating medical infrastructure and developing new therapies).

At the same time, this creates an inherent conflict of interest for the entire profession, as if major disease categories are “solved,” the lobbying power (which the industry depends upon) is reduced, and funds allotted to treating or researching that condition dry up. Most importantly, the entire industry (and regulatory apparatus) is structured around this status quo, so anytime someone tries to deviate from it, countless stakeholders will emerge to oppose it.

This was best demonstrated by a 2018 report which provoked considerable public outrage when it was publicized by the mainstream media:

Note: while I can’t prove this, given how rarely the media will expose pharmaceutical misconduct, I believe the reason it did in this specific case was not to help the public but rather to send a message to the industry (and investors) to avoid curative genomic therapies.

All of this, I believe, helps explain why, while many competing therapies will always exist, the medical industry (and regulators) will only target the ones with the potential to scale up enough to meaningfully compete with their bottom line (e.g., we all saw what happened to the off-patent COVID-19 treatments like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin). In contrast, there are many effective alternative therapies I know of which receive very little pushback from the industry because it will never be possible to deploy them at a scale which meaningfully threatens the industry’s bottom line.

That likewise touches upon a core dilemma I face writing this newsletter: many of the approaches we use (like neural therapy) which (often rapidly) get excellent results for patients are offered by very few physicians and require extensive training to administer optimally. As such, if I focus on them, it’s essentially useless information, as most readers will just feel frustrated they can’t access the therapy (or might end up with someone who does not correctly administer it to them). Likewise, there are many excellent therapies we sometimes use, but in very similar cases don’t, because their interactions with the body make them inherently unsuited for universal protocols (which is a big part of why I have not focused on cancer treatments here).

Because of this, I chose to discuss the therapies we use just enough so that when someone who is likely to benefit from them gets the opportunity to use them, they will be able to recognize the value of that opportunity, but I try to refrain from reaching the point where I feel I’m just wasting your time by telling you about something you won’t be able to use.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Conversely, I have put an immense degree of effort into presenting and accurately laying out how DMSO works, what it can treat and how to use it here because it’s very safe (and costs close to nothing), it has a very wide range of conditions it treats (including many “incurable” ones), and it’s effective enough that the majority of people who use it will experience significant benefit (which is why I’ve now received over 6,000 DMSO reports from readers and this newsletter has reached so many people).

However, despite the focus I’ve given to DMSO here, it’s not actually the primary thing we use in practice. Rather, prior to starting this project, my position was:

DMSO (especially IV DMSO) is life-changing for challenging neurological conditions, especially strokes (discussed here and here).

DMSO is an excellent first aid tool (e.g., for injuries or burns) that if possible should always be in your first aid kit.

DMSO is a significantly more effective and vastly safer NSAID (or Tylenol) alternative for treating tissue injuries and pain (discussed here) and one of the most potent anti-inflammatory options out there—which some patients really need (discussed here).

You can do a lot of really useful things by combining DMSO with another (typically natural) agent and applying it to the skin (discussed here and here).

DMSO is very helpful for herpes and one of the few ways you can reverse antibiotic resistance (discussed here).

DMSO has a lot of different therapeutic effects, most of which are similar to what many of our preferred therapies do. However, the key difference is that DMSO is more broad but less potent than them.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

As such, DMSO was more of a “tool in the toolbox” I used when it made sense rather than my primary modality, and I was mostly just outraged it had not seen wider adoption for some of these uses (e.g., strokes or an ibuprofen alternative) since there is such a massive need to have better therapeutic options in those cases (making it be one of the clearest examples of FDA malfeasance, particularly since the FDA stonewalled it for decades despite extensive proof it worked, widespread public and scientific protest, and multiple Congressional hearings).

So, when I started this series, my goal was essentially to elucidate those six points, provide something beneficial everyone here could actually use without needing a difficult to find expert in the field, and try to put 3 months (or maybe 6) into it because I felt the subject had not been given the attention it deserved. Put differently, I never expected DMSO to be the focus of this newsletter or that years of my life would go into researching it (there are other therapies I planned to extensively discuss here). That essentially happened because:

•I saw that there was vastly more pertinent DMSO literature than I had initially imagined (much of which exists outside the databases AI systems use and hence is unlikely to ever be seen).

•From that I discovered DMSO excelled in certain conditions I had not previously known its value in, many of which otherwise are quite hard to treat (e.g., for the eyes and for the lungs).

•The efficacy readers were reporting for DMSO (across a broad swathe of ailments) was higher than what we’d seen since it was rarely the primary therapy we utilized.

•I realized DMSO (due to its ability to partially improve a variety of critical but immensely underappreciated aspects of health) provided an excellent vehicle for elucidating many of the concepts I’d wanted to cover.

•Due to the difficulty of this project and DMSO costing so little that no advertiser will make enough to fund promoting it, I realized it was unlikely anyone else would take the time to compile all the relevant information on DMSO, so it felt like I had an obligation to do the project.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Medical Sales Funnels

In many ways, addictive street drugs represent the purest distillation of the business framework I outlined earlier: it’s easy to continually expand the market by creating new addicts, once people are addicted they will do anything to get the drug (making it possible to sell at a high markup and ensure a large volume of repeating sales), and because it’s so profitable, funding is available to neutralize competitors (e.g., with cartel violence) so market exclusivity is maintained.

Conversely, this business model comes with a massive cost, as it not only removes its customers from productively contributing to society (as their lives are lost to addiction) but also disrupts the lives of those around them (e.g., through the crime needed to fund addictions, turf violence as rival groups compete for customers, and increasing corruption as they try to rope the government into supporting their enterprise). Because of this, for centuries this “ideal” business model has recurred across societies regardless of how harsh the measures governments take to stop it.

One of the most common critiques of the pharmaceutical industry is that the entire enterprise is a more sophisticated form of this model: the drugs that are widely sold are designed to hook people for life and the immense lobbying the industry can afford (so the government supports them) effectively takes the place of cartel violence to maintain their market monopoly.

Note: other common criticisms include several of the largest pharmaceutical companies (e.g., Bayer via IG Farben) having been deeply entwined with Nazi Germany, and that many major pharma firms were once leading marketers and manufacturers of cocaine, methamphetamine, and heroin (Bayer famously marketed heroin as a “non-addictive” wonder drug).

Furthermore, unlike classic drug enterprises which have to market their products from the shadows, the state sanctioning of their business model makes it possible for them to publicly market the products to the entire society, acquire far more customers than an illegal enterprise ever could, and buy out both the media and government so criticisms of their products are not allowed to be aired.

Seeking to maximize profit, the industry hence seeks out "blockbuster" drugs and feeds each one into their robust sales apparatus. For this model to work, as the Goldman Sachs memo illustrates, the drugs need to be taken perpetually so curative ones that are taken briefly are not permissible.

Note: a significant amount of the research I cite in this newsletter originates from less wealthy countries with robust scientific infrastructure (e.g., Russia). I believe this is because those countries cannot afford to subsidize costly perpetual medical care, and hence are motivated to explore less costly options that can cure illnesses and require far fewer administrations.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Seeking to maximize profit, the industry hence seeks out "blockbuster" drugs and feeds each one into their robust sales apparatus. For this model to work, as the Goldman Sachs memo illustrates, the drugs need to be taken perpetually so curative ones that are taken briefly are not permissible.

Note: a significant amount of the research I cite in this newsletter originates from less wealthy countries with robust scientific infrastructure (e.g., Russia). I believe this is because those countries cannot afford to subsidize costly perpetual medical care, and hence are motivated to explore less costly options that can cure illnesses and require far fewer administrations.

Fittingly, the medical profession has largely moved away from the language of “cure.” For centuries, major medical dictionaries—including the Oxford Concise Medical Dictionary, Bantam Medical Dictionary, and Barron’s Dictionary of Medical Terms—either omitted a clear definition of “cure” or defined it only minimally.1 2 The word is also notably absent from the indexes of core references such as Merck’s Manual and Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine.1 2 In practice, physicians are strongly discouraged from promising or even declaring a “cure” in many contexts, particularly for chronic conditions. You cannot be accused of failing to achieve something the profession rarely claims is possible.

Note: while this linguistic caution is understandable as it helps protect patients from false hope and physicians from liability when relapses occur, it simultaneously fosters a toxic cultural mindset in which “managing” chronic conditions becomes the ceiling rather than the floor, discouraging both doctors and patients from diligently pursuing root-cause resolution or promising alternative therapies.

Because of this, every successful pharmaceutical lies somewhere along a spectrum of being "addictive" to "ineffective." Much of this results from the fact the body is designed to maintain homeostasis and resist unnatural alterations of physiology, so since most drugs work by inhibiting an enzyme, inhibiting a receptor, or stimulating a receptor, the body will counteract this by creating the opposite effect. As such, the human response to medications is frequently either:

•For the effect to be temporary and only last as long as medication is there

•For progressively higher doses of the medication to be required to elicit the same effect

•For the body to shift to an unnatural baseline where it can no longer function without the artificial counterweight of the medication (which in many cases equates to a chemical dependency and addiction to the drug because of how severe the withdrawals are).

Note: sometimes additional steps are involved. For example, acid reflux frequently results from a lack of stomach acid (which prevents the top of the stomach from getting the signal to close) which argues for supplementing meals with stomach acid (that beyond frequently curing reflux, provides numerous other health benefits). However rather than do this, the preferred approach is to completely suppress stomach acid production so nothing is there to reflux, making it very difficult to stop the medications because once small (insufficient) amounts of acid return, they will reflux and cause heart burn.

Since this business model is so reliable, my view is that it’s inevitable more products than I can count will emerge to support it and it’s an exercise in futility to stop it. Because of that, my focus has been directed to three areas:

•Identifying the (typically non-addictive) pharmaceutical drugs which I nonetheless think make a lot of sense to use in certain contexts.

•Finding better alternatives to the commonly marketed drugs.

•Directing my energy towards opposing the most harmful (rather than useless) medications.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Sadly, despite restricting my focus to the last category, there’s simply no shortage, as beyond the design of pharmaceutical drugs inevitably producing side effects (due to some of the functions they suppress being essential for health), those side effects are often actually an upside for the industry because they create additional problems that require other drugs to treat, hence creating a robust “sales funnel.”

“Sales funnels” for context, are a classic marketing concept: cast a wide net with a low cost (or free) product with a high rate of conversion, pull a certain number of those caught into buying a more expensive product, and then in each successive funnel, get a smaller number of people to buy an even more expensive option.

When observing medicine, I hence cannot help but notice just how many things in it are effectively sales funnels (e.g., general practitioners not only function to provide a steady stream of patient referrals to the more expensive medical services, but also, for “wellness” give patients a large number of tests that convert a significant number of patients into taking the common lifelong drugs which half of American adults are on at least one of).

SSRI Antidepressants

From the start, I decided to focus on SSRIs as while they significantly help a subset of patients, I also feel they are one of the worst offenders on the market. Beyond being massively overprescribed, they frequently ruin people’s lives (often in very cruel ways), are often nearly impossible to withdraw from, and have predatory sales funnels that affect large numbers of American women:

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Unfortunately, SSRIs languished in the same place many other toxic drugs did: they harmed a significant number of people but the drugs made enough money (one in six adults take psychiatric medications) that it was possible for industry to corral the entire government and media into sweeping them under the rug, so this issue remained largely unknown outside of those affected by them (whereas with the COVID vaccines, we finally crossed the threshold where so many people were injured it simply was at last not possible to sweep everything under rug).

To try to shift this, I decided to focus not on the common side effects of the drugs (which are easy to ignore if you aren’t directly affected by it), but rather the psychotic violence and mass shootings they occasionally cause. A very strong case existed for this, but up to that point, all the supporting literature for it was either in dense books most people were unlikely to read (e.g., Peter Gøtzsche’s Deadly Psychiatry and Organized Denial) or in news articles which only presented slices of the evidence and did so in an excessively sensationalistic manner unlikely to persuade a neutral reader.

My theory, was that since so much effort has gone into politicizing mass shootings and the ensuing arguments over gun control, the right (segments of which already identified with using fewer psychiatric medications than the left) would be very receptive to the fact SSRIs were triggering many of the shootings being blamed on inadequate gun control. Furthermore, my hope was that once this position was adopted, it would spur an interest by its proponents (e.g., political commentators) into finally looking at all the other far more common side effects SSRIs cause and make enough people talk about them that it was finally an acceptable topic of discourse (as previously, much like vaccines, beyond being ridiculed for believing SSRIs were dangerous, you would also be chastised for hurting patients by reducing their access to these “life-saving” medications).

So, I tried to draft a very clear case for this (along with a follow up explaining the dangers of SSRIs and the corruption that allowed them to come to market) and then (at a time when this newsletter was much smaller) put them out immediately following a school shooting which was large enough to become the national media story. That article1,2,3 somehow made it to Tucker Carlson, who then, five weeks later, for the first time in the mainstream media, did a segment on the topic for Fox News:

Following this, as more and more political figures on the right were willing to broach the subject, it became a gradually acceptable topic to discuss (e.g., during his 2024 campaign, RFK Jr. shared a thread on the article I wrote stating: “Any conversation about gun violence is incomplete if it doesn’t touch on mental health and the suppressed evidence implicating SSRIs in suicide and homicide”).

Likewise, the successive attention which bubbled up in the alternative media to the frequent side effects of SSRIs (and Secretary Kennedy’s public acknowledgment of it) has gradually brought mainstream attention to this, including at a recent May 4th panel (covered by the press) which began with victims of SSRIs sharing what they (like many others) have experienced:

Note: Lauren’s story (beginning at 17:00), went viral online due to many being understandably shocked SSRIs could take away your ability to have sex or emotionally connect with your partner.

The panel then concluded with Secretary Kennedy stating we need to do better, that withdrawing from SSRIs is significantly more difficult than withdrawing from heroin, and announcing that the Federal Government would begin combatting this. He laid out a multiagency national effort to do so which will educate health care providers across the country in the dangers of SSRIs (particularly inappropriate prescribing—which is one of the largest issues with SSRIs), provide non-pharmaceutical mental health alternatives, and train providers in how to correctly taper off antidepressants (along with reimbursing them for doing this).

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Note: the full panel can be viewed here and here. Additionally, SSRIs are not the only psychiatric with major issues (e.g., last week immediately before this panel I wrote about the many serious issues with benzodiazepines and treating anxiety and at some point I intend to cover the equally problematic antipsychotics).

Despite everything I’ve seen happen over the last four years, I still never believed something like this would happen. For context, in a period when the pharmaceutical industry had much less influence over the FDA, it took more than a decade of activism, leaks and Congressional hearings to simply get a warning label on SSRIs that they could cause suicide. This hence went miles beyond anything even the most optimistic activists had ever imagined could be possible, illustrating why it is so critical to shift the Overton window and make taboo subjects acceptable for regular discussion.

Additionally, it was quite notable that this entire effort goes contrary to the entire foundation of the medical system, as Secretary Kennedy’s ultimate goal was to decrease rather than increase pharmaceutical sales. As such, predictable criticisms of his completely reasonable approach emerged, such as this one from Senator Tina Smith (D-MN):

People I care a whole lot about rely on SSRIs to make their lives work. I don’t know where I would be without SSRIs. RFK Jr. can get his fucking hands and crazy conspiracy theories out of our medicine cabinets”

Protective reactions like these are inevitable, and illustrate precisely why this issue has taken so long to gain traction. But rather than wait for the system to reform itself, my approach has always been to focus on what I can actually offer patients right now.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

The Natural Approach to Medicine

Throughout my career, I have tried to prioritize natural therapies, in part because they are often more effective for addressing root causes of illness, but more so, because they simply have less toxicity so you are much less likely to injure people with them. This, essentially, is why, much in the same way I do not critique mediocre drugs I feel provide minimal benefits, I have not focused on many of the same unscrupulous dynamics I've highlighted throughout this article existing within the natural medicine field (e.g., many marginal products are widely pushed simply because they have large profit margins, and a lot of the drama in the health freedom movement over the last few years has ultimately originated from competing parties trying to sink their competitors so they can monopolize sales to this newly created market).

Note: one of the most disillusioning things for me when I entered the natural medicine field was meeting well-known male holistic doctors who rallied against the egregious conduct of the pharmaceutical industry or doctors in general, that then did many of the same things they’d described to their own patients to maximize revenue. From this, I gradually concluded that the more aggressively and audaciously people promoted themselves, the more likely they were to be dishonest.

In my own case, much of my own medical philosophy essentially boils down to:

•Safety is more important than efficacy (so I am very hesitant to use therapies I think have potential risks, and will back off much earlier than others when I see adverse reactions emerge), which in most cases I believe is all-around correct, but simultaneously not appropriate in acute settings (where some degree of harm is often required to save someone’s life).

•If you have to perpetually give someone a therapy, it probably means you are not treating the disease correctly (or only treating the periphery of it), so in those instances (outside of ones where no viable alternative exists such as replacing a critical hormone the body can no longer produce), the focus should always come back to figuring out how to address the underlying illness (which often requires untangling some type of complex connected web in the body or the body, mind, and spirit).

•People frequently develop tolerances or sensitivities to therapies, so if something does work, you only want to use it when it’s clearly needed to avoid being caught in a situation where it doesn’t work when it’s really needed.

As you can imagine, these beliefs aren’t particularly common as they go against the sales focused mindset of the medical industry.

Since I receive many questions on this topic, I’d like to briefly illustrate how these principles intersect with DMSO.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

First, many diseases (particularly degenerative neurological ones) essentially follow this progression:

1. Something pathologic is present in the body.

2. It repeatedly injures the body (e.g., the nervous system).

3. Over time, tissue damage (or tissues being stuck in a shocked state) accumulates, and the function of the tissue is gradually compromised.

4. The tissue damage creates functional impairments the individual notices and wants addressed.

Typically, the earlier in that chain you can affect the process, the closer you get to treating the “root cause” of the illness (whereas if you only treat stage 4, which is what many pharmaceutical drugs do—in part due to their design and in part because stage 4 shifts are the easiest to quantify with conventional research), all you accomplish is reducing symptoms and needing to take the drug in perpetuity. Conversely, while treating stage 1 is ideal, it isn’t always possible to do, and in many cases, even if you do, the existing damage is still there.

Since DMSO essentially does a lot of different things many other therapies I routinely use do, but much less potently, it frequently addresses multiple of the above stages without being strong enough to cause a significant reaction, which is essentially why DMSO can frequently fix a wide range of complex illnesses without requiring as much precise targeting by a skilled clinician. Conversely, its ability to do each one varies, with it typically being the least effective at addressing stage 1.

Because of this, for example, we long believed that DMSO could not cure ALS, but as it seemed to help counteract stage 2, it could prevent the progression of the disease, making it a far from ideal option for the disease (but nonetheless still a dramatic improvement over what they could otherwise expect and thus justifiable). I hence was quite surprised to receive reports like this where the reader reported DMSO reversed their ALS (allowing them to regain strength and mobility that had been gone for years) and concluded that the symptoms returning once he stopped DMSO indicated it was addressing stages 2, 3, and 4 for him (discussed further here)

Likewise, when someone else reached out to share their gratitude for me publishing the DMSO series because high oral doses was what finally gave him the ability to walk (due to severe arthritis in one joint on each side), my response was: “if you’ve taken that much DMSO for a year and it has not permanently fixed the issue, you need to look into the root cause, and given what’s going on, I would do either this or this.”

Note: in his case, while I disagreed with perpetually treating the issue with DMSO, it’s also important to acknowledge the only option most people in those circumstances would have is to perpetually take an NSAID, which would be both significantly less effective and expose them to a real risk of a serious complication (prior to the COVID vaccines, NSAIDs were the arguably deadliest pharmaceutical drug in America due to all the gastric bleeds and kidney injuries they cause). So while I would prefer a different approach, compared to the standard options, DMSO management was a miracle.

I mention all of this because one of the most common questions I receive from readers is if they can take DMSO perpetually because of how good it is for you. My answer, in turn, has always been:

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Institutional Inertia

Most societies and institutions follow a similar trajectory: initially, they are the underdogs and have to be as innovative, flexible, and dedicated as possible to establish themselves. However, once they do, their focus shifts to maintaining their newfound position rather than advancing their original mission, and in many cases, this eventually leads to decadence, decay, and collapse (e.g., empires throughout history typically last seven generations because they all succumb to this cycle—a process which is initiated by members of the newly prosperous society collectively shifting their focus from advancing the national interest to finding ways to make as much money as possible for themselves and then once the wealth is accumulated, everyone aimlessly drifting into intellectualism, then decadence and then a societal collapse).

Likewise, whenever an industry or organization becomes assigned to addressing an issue, while bold strides are initially taken, the focus gradually shifts to protecting the institution and maintaining the status quo. For example I’ve never forgotten one clip from a documentary about soldiers who were injured by the (completely unnecessary) experimental anthrax vaccine, which much like the COVID vaccine, ended the careers of many promising soldiers despite widespread resistance against the shots.

Often times you find that people will protect the institution rather than disclose the truth. And as long as the institution stays intact, they’re protected.

Note: a documentary was recently made by CHD exposing the similar (illegal) travesty that happened to our military with the COVID-19 vaccines. I was requested to help promote it so enough people can attend the initial screening for it to make the impact they are hoping for. If this is an issue that is important to you, a trailer for the film and information on purchasing tickets can be found here.

This shift in focus commonly translates to the goal moving from solving the issue to providing an “indispensable service” by perpetually managing rather than fixing it (much in the same way many patients are perpetually treated with medications that cause increasingly severe side effects as they age).

As this process has occurred throughout history, it typically is attributed to financial incentives. For example, despite countless attempts over the decades, government contractors are notorious for overcharging and underdelivering on projects they’re paid to do, with California’s high speed rail being one of the most well known examples (which after more than 30 years of work and 15 billion spent, has only assembled 59 train bridges, not laid any track, and now is estimated will cost 4-7x what was promised when the funding was secured by a 2008 ballot initiative).

Because of this, many believe that spending more money on things (which desperately need help) can actually be counterproductive, as it incentivizes the responsible party to switch their focus to securing funding and planning spending rather than garnering results. Sadly, beyond government spending, this principle encapsulates why it is so difficult to find authentic charities to donate to (both within medicine and outside of it). Likewise, it illustrates why monopolies are so problematic in medicine, as it is only with real competition that the medical system will be motivated to find treatments which actually help their patients.

Note: government contracts pay for results upfront so that money can be saved all around by contractors not needing to secure more costly bank financing. I’ve long believed that if this model were switched (contractors were only paid upon successful completion of the contract), while there might be a small increase in overall costs and exclusion of some smaller contractors, this would be counterbalanced by far greater savings from contracts actually being completed for the original price promised. While nothing this extreme has been done, this week, the military announced unprecedented changes to how defense contracts will be procured1,2 which essentially implements parts of that (along with providing the peripheral support it needs to work), something I am hopeful might for the first time in my life curb America’s immense military spending.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

Conclusion

While financial incentives are the most obvious driver for institutions to abandon their original mission, from having repeatedly observed how this plays out inside institutions, I (and many others throughout history) have come to believe that plain human complacency and the widespread aversion to change play an equally central (and perhaps even larger) role. Most people would simply rather master a comfortable routine and get paid for it than face the constant uncertainty required to actually solve difficult problems, and once an organization passes its trying founding phase, its culture naturally selects for those people over genuine problem-solvers who disrupt its order.

What then is the antidote to all of this?

When I was much younger, mirroring what I read in spiritual texts, I saw many instances of people who were or became wealthy being far less happy than their less fortunate peers and realized that money without purpose was not only devoid of meaning, but often spiritual poison as one’s life purpose inevitably would warp to revolve around accumulating ever increasing amounts of money or status (along with all the effort it took to maintain) because they believed the happiness and contentment they could never find could be obtained with even more wealth.

Repeatedly observing this dynamic, I concluded that my purpose would be to learn as much about life as I could, and along that journey, find ways to help others, as while I was not born into a prosperous family, knowing what life was like in many places outside America, I felt immensely fortunate for where I had nonetheless ended up and that I had a spiritual obligation to pay that forward.

Because of this mindset, I would always seek out new and challenging problems to solve, and before long gravitated towards medicine because very few things are as complex as the human body (or as meaningful for others when you can finally figure something out and help heal someone). I was hence quite shocked to discover not only that inquisitive medical students were the minority, but more so, that the entire educational process was structured to gradually remove that mindset from trainees, and just how many of the doctors I trained under both had extremely repetitive practices (which to me would be unbearable) and were less than happy about their life, yet unwilling to consider different ways to manage their patients even when it was clear their approach did not work and a (not too controversial) alternative was offered to them.

I’ve hence long wondered what the solution is to all of this. On one hand, I hold the idealistic perspective that if people are presented with a better way to practice medicine, supported in enacting it, and shown that they can find the passion for medicine they had long ago lost, they would eagerly embrace it (as I’ve seen more physicians than I count in those circumstances do so). Conversely, from watching attempt after attempt to reform the medical system at many different scales fail (and seeing how effectively any entrenched industry will resist change unless a disruptive force emerges and rapidly eliminates the entire sector), I’ve adopted the more cynical perspective that medicine will only change if it faces genuine disruptive competition.

>>24604080

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/why-medicine-wont-cure-you-and-whats

RFK’s approach on mental health hence offers an intriguing third (hybrid) option; provide physicians with a safe, supportive and guided framework to break from the existing mold and practice, while simultaneously rekindling their interest in medicine by seeing the results this previously unconventional approach creates.

It’s hard to describe how much joy this brings me, not only because it offers a better path forward for medicine in general, but also because so many people I was close to have had their lives ruined by SSRIs, and (even at the time I wrote the original mass shooting article), it always felt like there was so much inertia behind the drugs that it would be impossible to ever shift that. I hence want to deeply thank each of you for what you’ve done to create the current unprecedented climate we are in and for your help in supporting this newsletter that has allowed a lot of deeply meaningful things I never thought could happen to happen.

Lastly, I’ve been hard at work over the last two weeks on the second part of the neurology series (spinal injuries, peripheral nerve issues, and how many of DMSO’s therapeutic effects are mediated by the shifts it creates within the liquid crystalline water throughout the body—something you can to some extent see if you look carefully as DMSO mixes with water). I’m presently starting the first draft of the final section (neuropathic pain), so in theory it should be done by Saturday and going forward, most of the remaining ones should be easier to write as the densest topics and mechanisms will now have been covered.

>>24604155

“If you can’t trace a clear benefit to taking it (or are at high risk of a condition it prevents), I would not take it perpetually. This is partly because I am philosophically opposed to that approach to medicine, partly because one segment of the DMSO community believes longterm use stresses the liver as the liver detoxifies it (although to the best of my knowledge no data corroborates this—while in contrast liver failure has been cured with DMSO), and partly because in chronic pain, if break days aren’t periodically used, it can lose its effectiveness. That said, there are people who’ve taken it daily for 30 years and reported no issues from doing so, but ultimately the data to solidly answer if this is helpful or harmful will likely never be collected.”

>>24604080, >>24604084, >>24604086, >>24604095, >>24604108, >>24604112, >>24604117, >>24604123, >>24604128, >>24604132, >>24604143, >>24604148, >>24604152, >>24604155, >>24604184, >>24604157, >>24604168, >>24604171 Why Medicine Won't Cure You (and What's Finally Changing DMSO) - A Midwestern Doctor

Bakes!… ty

>>24604050

>>24604224

bunned

o7

DMSO Heals the Eyes and Transforms Ophthalmology

DMSO's unique therapeutic properties reveal the unifying thread between many different "incurable" eye diseases.

A Midwestern Doctor

Oct 25, 2025

Story at a Glance:

• DMSO is an “umbrella remedy” capable of treating a wide range of challenging ailments due to its combination of therapeutic properties (e.g., reducing inflammation, improving circulation, and reviving dying cells).

• DMSO has a unique affinity for the eyes, resulting in it (often spontaneously) treating a wide range of visual disorders that frequently cannot be treated with conventional therapeutic options.

• DMSO’s ability to restore circulation, revive dying cells, and stabilize misfolded proteins allows it to treat a variety of retinal diseases (e.g., macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy or retinitis pigmentosa—in some cases reversing permanent blindness), eliminate visual obstructions (e.g., floaters and cataracts), reverse glaucoma or Fuchs’ dystrophy, and restore normal focus (frequently eliminating the need for glasses).

• DMSO’s anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial properties allow it to treat dry eyes, inflammatory diseases around the eye (e.g., blepharitis, styes, and psoriasis) or within the eye (e.g., iritis, uveitis, conjunctivitis, keratitis), along with bacterial, fungal, parasitic, or viral eye infections such as shingles.

•DMSO’s healing properties also allow it to heal a variety of eye injuries (including severe ones which would otherwise require eye removal), skin issues around the eye (e.g., burns, skin tags, and under-eye bags), and eliminate eye muscle spasms.

•This article will review the extensive data demonstrating DMSO’s efficacy for eye diseases, along with an examination of the most common protocols used for them and other natural approaches that also aid in the treatment of common eye disorders.

Since 2024, I have been working diligently to present the extensive data that DMSO is a remarkable therapeutic that is uniquely suited to treat many highly challenging medical conditions due to its counteracting many root causes of disease (whereas, in contrast, vaccines cause a myriad of health issues by inducing those key drivers of illness). From this, I’ve compiled a series of articles synthesizing thousands of studies that have shown DMSO effectively treats:

Strokes, paralysis, a wide range of neurological disorders (e.g., Down Syndrome and dementia), and many circulatory disorders (e.g., Raynaud’s, varicose veins, hemorrhoids), which I discussed here.

A wide range of tissue injuries, such as sprains, concussions, burns, surgical incisions, and spinal cord injuries (discussed here).

Chronic pain (e.g., from a bad disc, bursitis, arthritis, or complex regional pain syndrome), which I discussed here.

A wide range of autoimmune, protein, and contractile disorders, such as scleroderma, amyloidosis, and interstitial cystitis (discussed here).

A variety of head conditions, such as tinnitus, vision loss, dental problems, and sinusitis (discussed here).

A wide range of internal organ diseases (discussed here).

Many different respiratory disorders, including asthma and COPD (discussed here)

Many different gastrointestinal disorders, such as bowel inflammation, cirrhosis, and pancreatitis (discussed here)

A wide range of skin conditions, such as burns, varicose veins, acne, hair loss, ulcers, skin cancer, and many autoimmune dermatologic diseases (discussed here).

Many challenging infectious conditions, including chronic bacterial infections, herpes, and shingles (discussed here).

Many aspects of cancer (e.g., many of cancer’s debilitating symptoms, making cancer treatments more potent, greatly reducing the toxicity of conventional therapies, and turning cancer cells back into normal cells), which I discussed here.

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dmso-heals-the-eyes-and-transforms

Note: as fate had it, Murray lived about 3 hours away from Rebecca Cunningham, the Texas-based documentary film maker who cured her neighbor’s terminal COPD with nebulized DMSO, after which millions saw Dan’s COPD story.1,2 As DMSO changed her life, she is currently collecting other DMSO testimonials on her Rumble channel and kindly agreed to travel to Murray to film this. If you have a story to share and are ever passing through Wimberley or visiting the hill country in Texas, please reach out to her.

>>24604331

For this reason, we are currently sorting through thousands of UVBI studies, including dozens of studies (many of which were conducted with hundreds of patients) which show UVBI treats a myriad of challenging ophthalmologic conditions such as:

blepharitis,1 keratitis,1 corneal inflammation,1 herpes zoster ophthalmicus,1 traumatic eye infection,1 uveitis,1,2,3,4,5 iridocyclitis,1,2 choroiditis,1 chorioretinopathy,1,2,3,4 choroidal and chorioretinal dystrophy,1,2 macular degeneration,1 retinitis pigmentosa,1,2 retinal contusion,1 retinal ischemia,1,2 retinal and fundus hemorrhages,1,2,3,4 retinal artery and vein occlusions,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15 diabetic retinopathy,1 ischemic optic neuropathy,1,2,3,4,5 optic neuritis,1,2,3 optic nerve atrophy (traumatic or inflammatory),1,2,3 encephalopathic vision loss1

DMSO’s Toxicity

Most assessments showed DMSO was orders of magnitude safer than many commonly used therapeutic substances (e.g., its LD50 across species is approximately 20 g/kg, and cells exhibit no adverse effects from prolonged exposure until DMSO concentrations exceed 1%—which is effectively impossible to reach in the body as nearly a liter of DMSO would need to be drunk each day).

Note: as cells are quite sensitive to changes in their external environment, similar effects to those observed with 1% DMSO are seen for many other “safe” substances at far lower concentrations. However, these toxicities are typically not clinically relevant as pharmaceutical drugs rapidly dilute in the body, exposing tissues to minimal concentrations of them.

>>24604333

notable

>>24604325

when someone is pure of heart, their message bounces high into the collective conscious field

what fatty doesnt know is he is helping…top kek

love the smell of panic at lunch time!

>>24604342

https://www.micronicsilver.com/shop

>>24604331

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dmso-heals-the-eyes-and-transforms

DMSO and The Eyes

Ophthalmologist Norbert J. Becquet, M.D., of Little Rock, Arkansas, reported to the American Academy of Medical Preventics [now ACAM] in May 1980 that he had great success using DMSO in treating cataracts and other eye problems. “I’ve treated two hundred patients in the last year for macular degeneration, macular edema, and traumatic uveitis.”

DMSO’s uses for the eyes originally emerged after participants in early clinical trials noted that their vision frequently improved when an unrelated issue was being treated. Noticing this in several patients being treated for musculoskeletal issues, Stanley Jacob referred them to a local ophthalmologist, who then conducted years of research in this area.

I started using DMSO for my arthritis and the side effects were improved vision and better breathing

Likewise, readers here have frequently reported that vision significantly improves after DMSO is applied to another part of the body—particularly the neck (which is likely due to its blood supply being closer to the eyes).

I will now attempt to cover all pertinent data explaining why DMSO helps the eyes and the specific conditions it has been observed to improve (which comprise most standard ophthalmologic conditions—including many that have no good conventional treatment options).

Note: DMSO’s uses for the eyes have been known about in the right circles for a long time (e.g., one reader shared their gifted alternative MD suggested it over 20 years ago).

Ocular DMSO Distribution

The logic behind putting DMSO in the eyes is that a much stronger dose can get to the eyes than what would arise from systemic applications of DMSO. To evaluate DMSO’s distribution (and that of its metabolic breakdown products), radioactive forms of DMSO (DMSO synthesized from either 35S or 3H or both) were placed in animals and then their entire bodies were monitored for radiation emissions.

In one study, it was noted that while DMSO tended to distribute evenly throughout the body (typically being at a lower concentration in the tissue than in the blood), in the iris and ciliary body, it matched the blood’s concentration, while in the cornea (the surface of the eye), after 2 hours it was 2.2 times higher than the blood in rabbits and 4 times higher in rats (but did not increase with repeated admissions). In other words, DMSO specifically concentrates in the cornea when administered into the body (after which it rapidly cleared), which likely explains why incidental improvements in vision are repeatedly observed when DMSO is used in another part of the body and to some extent concentrated in the vitreous (however I cannot say how much it concentrates within the vitreous portion of the eye as I have not come across any data on this). This concentrating is important as it explains why low doses of DMSO frequently incidentally improve the eyes.

Note: in humans, when DMSO was taken each day at 3-30 times the standard dose (achieved by covering the entire body in DMSO), 9% of participants experienced burning or aching eyes—again indicating DMSO concentrates in the cornea. However, even at these high doses, other than temporary eye irritation, no adverse effects occurred to the eyes.

Conversely, in another study, where rats’ eyes were exposed to DMSO, it was found that regardless of the route of administration or the concentration used, DMSO rapidly cleared from the eyes:

DMSO Eye Safety

Due to the intense scrutiny placed upon DMSO because of the potential refractory issues and the inherent uncertainty over if DMSO could be placed in the eyes, extensive research was conducted on its eye safety. From this, no study—including high dose ones in humans or primates was able to detect eye toxicity from DMSO (all of which I summarized here—including a JAMA publication attesting to DMSO’s eye safety).

Furthermore, in addition to the effects of systemic DMSO upon the eyes, the effects of DMSO applied directly to the eyes have also been studied, where it has been found no toxicity occurs beyond temporary irritation at higher concentrations unless high doses are directly injected into the eyes—something I believe is reflective of DMSO’s tendency to rapidly dilute once it enters the body (making local high concentrations only possible to achieve with injections). Those studies are as follows:

1. The most detailed study put various combinations of steroids, 15% DMSO, or a saline placebo into rabbit’s eyes. A wide range of parameters inside the eyes were studied (e.g., regular body weights, intraocular pressure, retinoscopy, ophthalmoscopic, and biomicroscopic examinations alongside dissection of the eyes and examinations of their contents), alongside those outside the eye (e.g., u

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dmso-heals-the-eyes-and-transforms

>>24604387

Water is the carrier, after a shower while wet, slather DMSO on the face and eye lids.

I no longer wear glasses and am not required to wear glasses when driving.

ALWAYS apply DMSO TO THE EYES.

Your a fuckin idiot.

>>24604387

1. An unpublished study (detailed in this 1980 book), of a series of 30 German patients (along with 280 more treated for various periods) who took DMSO detected no adverse effects in any of the subject’s eyes, with one author noting the dosages required to create the lens effects seen in animals were astronomical compared to what humans took.

Note: I have now received a large number of reports from readers who shared they’ve used DMSO eye drops for a prolonged period without issues(e.g. here are 15 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15 along with two in dogs1,2).

The existing data also shows the toxicity threshold for DMSO to the eyes is much higher than the doses eyes will be exposed to from clinical applications (as the small amounts of DMSO dilute and rapidly pass through the eyes rather than remaining concentrated in one spot). For example:

•DMSO has long been used to preserve corneas1,2 as it has a low enough toxicity to the eyes that high concentrations of it (e.g., 10%) can be used to cryopreserve corneal and conjunctival cells and prevent otherwise lethal cold from destroying them.1,2

•Low concentrations of DMSO (0.01%) were not found to subsequently affect retinal function, whereas low concentrations of alcohol did.

•A 2004 study demonstrated DMSO had negligible toxicity to the eyes. It found that keeping human retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) cells in 1% DMSO for 48 hours slightly decreased their viability (demonstrated through a reduced optical density), while 2% (after 72 hours) slowed their growth,1,2 while a study on rabbit RPEs showed that 4% DMSO after 48 hours significantly increased apoptosis and enhanced their antioxidant ability.

Note: when I compared this to sustained exposures from other commonly used drugs, similar toxicities were seen at much lower concentrations (typically between 0.24% to 0.00072%).

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dmso-heals-the-eyes-and-transforms

>>24604438

Watching the FDA get dismantled and dissolved in my life time, is the best!

You are NOT anon.

You are a shitty low iq shill.

>>24604446

anons read and discern for themselves

The History and Safety of DMSO

One of the major questions everyone has with DMSO is, “How could I never have heard of something that costs almost nothing and safely treats a broad swathe of ailments?”

For this reason, and to head off the inevitable attacks any off-patent therapy which threatens the pharmaceutical industry faces, two of the earliest articles I wrote in this series were written to explain that peculiar history.1,2 The abridged version of them is as follows:

DMSO is found throughout nature and is present in many fruits and vegetables. After being discovered in 1866, it was forgotten until the 1940s when an industrial need for more solvents led to it being re-examined. In the 1950s, one company that was the primary American producer of it (by extracting it from wood pulp) assigned one of its chemists (Herschler) to determine whether any other uses existed for the solvents they were producing.

Herschler eventually discovered DMSO could bring substances into the body (making it an ideal drug delivery option), and in 1961, reached out to a leading researcher at the local medical school, Dr. Stanley Jacob. Jacob, having recently learned it had just been discovered DMSO could be used as a cryopreservative (solving a major challenge in medicine), was receptive to Herschler. Jacob began experimenting and rapidly discovered DMSO had a number of remarkable therapeutic properties which transformed medicine, so before long, he decided to invest his entire career (and personal life) behind DMSO. Fortunately, once Jacob (an exceptionally selfless individual) used up his life savings to conduct the initial DMSO research, the Dean at his medical school decided to support him with additional funding and protect him from his hostile peers (which was an immense stroke of luck).

Before long, skeptical doctors in Oregon were gradually won over due to the incredible results DMSO produced, and pharmaceutical companies began making massive investments in DMSO. At this point, production of medical DMSO shifted entirely to synthetic sources, as it was not possible to achieve the high purity required for pharmaceuticals from wood-derived preparations, despite the slightly higher cost of the synthetic route.

Around this same time, the FDA just barely averted a national thalidomide disaster, and used the public attention around this to pass a 1962 law which gave them broad powers to police the production of medications in the United States.

In 1964, Jacob and pharmaceutical company representatives met with the FDA scientist who stopped thalidomide, who told them the FDA wanted to do everything possible to permit further testing of DMSO. However, she also shared, they were simultaneously worried about being overwhelmed by a large number of DMSO drug applications. Because of this, DMSO became the FDA’s test case to work out its new regulatory powers, and a variety of roadblocks were put in place against it.

Nonetheless, the remarkable trial results kept coming in, DMSO rapidly became the most demanded drug in America, and much of the public simply ignored the FDA’s requests to refrain from using a remedy which had not yet been proven safe or effective and started using DMSO themselves. In short, the FDA was eager to halt DMSO research. Then, on September 9th 1965, a woman taking numerous drugs including DMSO, with multiple allergic reactions to what she ingested eventually had a fatal anaphylactic reaction. In response, the FDA began cancelling existing drug investigation permits—despite the death never being linked to DMSO (nor anything similar having happened since).

>>24604487

Then in November, data emerged showing that very high doses of DMSO, far above those ever used, could change the refractive index in dogs eyes (effectively making them require glasses). At that point, the FDA banned all DMSO research in the United States and sent out a global telegram that DMSO could make you blind—despite no issues being observed in any of the 37,000 clinical trial participants (or the other 100,000 people using DMSO). In contrast, numerous commonly used drugs are known change the refractory index in humans.1,2,3,4

Note: this is why so many studies I’ve cited in this series were researched between 1961-1965 and not later.

The scientific and patient community understandably rebelled against this, at which point the FDA decided to wage a war of intimidation to assert its newfound powers and bring the medical community into compliance (which was ultimately successful and part of why researchers now rarely pursue unorthodox topics).

The scientific community fought back, and before long produced robust data showing that DMSO had no toxicity at all (e.g., in one 1975 study, prisoners had their entire body covered with DMSO gel daily for 90 days and then were subject to every test imaginable—with no toxicity being detected), along with hosting numerous symposiums showing promising DMSO research from around the world.

Note: around this time, DMSO eye drops came into use, and have been estimated to have now been used without issue by hundreds of thousands of people.

Sadly, for decades, the FDA refused to relent, and eventually numerous Congressional hearings were held (the first of which was immediately preceded by the 60 Minutes segment, as Mike Wallace wanted to draw national attention to the issue).

To defend their increasingly unpopular prohibition on DMSO,the FDA repeatedly claimed they would soon approve DMSO, and just needed “well controlled studies”—which by the FDA’s arbitrary standards were impossible to do with DMSO, as the rapidity with which it elicited improvements alongside the characteristic odor and skin irritation it created made it impossible to ever conduct blinded studies.

Note: the one approved use of DMSO (for interstitial cystitis) occurred shortly before the 1980 hearing, possibly to address criticisms that they were stonewalling DMSO.

Eventually, in response to outrage over the FDA raiding natural medicine suppliers at gunpoint, Congress passed the 1994 DSHEA Act which took away the FDA’s ability to regulate natural products (and hence DMSO), but sadly by this point, decades of prohibition had made DMSO largely forgotten. Following this, DMSO began being incorporated into a variety of pharmaceutical products as a “safe and inert” ingredient which facilitated the function of the active ingredients. While in tandem, extensive research continued to be conducted on its uses in medicine (with tens of thousands having now been published).

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dmso-heals-the-eyes-and-transforms

Corneal and Conjunctival Disorders

DMSO’s therapeutic properties and its ability to concentrate within the cornea make it well suited to healing issues at the surface of the eyes, particularly since DMSO, being an acetylcholine esterase inhibitor also stimulates parasympathetic activity (which increases tear secretion) and reduces duct inflammation or obstruction (also increasing tear secretion).

Because of this, one of the most common uses of DMSO is to relieve eye dryness. For example, with readers here:

I have suffered from severe dry eye for years. (I’ve had to have Meibomian Gland Probing done twice for my condition, in addition to numerous other treatments). I am having a [very] positive experience using daily DMSO eye drops, I find I need much less commercial eye drops and I am very hopeful about the continued benefit of the DMSO drops.

It takes care of my chronic dry eyes for 6 to 8 hrs.

After about a week of DMSO on my face, I don’t need eyedrops when I wake up each morning😳. I am astounded.

I no longer have dry eye syndrome in that eye.

I have Sjögren’s syndrome and my eyes were very dry and inflamed, despite using eyedrops. I’ve been using it for about three weeks with great results. Stings when first applied but the relief is instantaneous and I don’t need eyedrops any more.

I’ve been using DMSO in my eyes for more than a year now. Slowly increasing the strength. Even at [low doses] it’s life changing! No more dry eyes or eye infections. Better vision. For anyone who is hesitant, start slowly and “see” 🤣 the amazing results.

Note: there are many other similar reader reports1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20

(including eye dryness from Parkinson’s). Likewise, I’ve come across reports of individuals with other causes of significant eye dryness which responded to systemic DMSO administration (e.g., a patient with Sjögren’s syndrome whose symptoms, including the eye dryness, fully resolved after IV DMSO).

Likewise, more severe issues at the surface of the eye also have responded to DMSO:

Because I struggle with EDS, mast cell activation disorder and the brittle cornea problems that go with that, I have been making DMSO-hyaluronic acid eye drops for myself. The DMSO always stings, bc I have nearly no cornea between my nerve endings and the rest of the world; there’s no getting around that. But I use these drops several times a day, b/c I have no corneal interface for tears to cling to, and the floaters I couldn’t see through or around, b/c they’re always so numerous and large, and over the last month, they dissolved after years of suffering with them. This combination has also created a film over my cornea so the nerve endings aren’t exposed and burning all day and night.1,2

For decades, I experienced mysterious, intermittent left eye pain that could only be relieved by immobilising the eye, and sometimes only by also mobilising myself in an upright position. The pain contributed to regular severe sleep disruption. [I then saw a lot of doctors, received many diagnoses, and tried many standard and integrative treatments—none of which worked, and finally learned] they could see evidence of a past trauma in the eye with an oval shape [possibly due to a piece of glass from a broken fluorescent tube was lodged in my left eye for a couple of days in 1974]—but still could not provide anything helpful. Three months ago, I started with DMSO eye drops [and] was getting the best pain management ever! Sleep improved and I reduced them to once a day and when needed for pain relief. A Schirmer Test this week showed tear production in the left eye at 7. Previous high was 4. The right eye had always been above 10 which is considered healthy. Thank you AMD!

Note: I have also read reports of DMSO healing debilitating corneal abrasions when nothing else could help.

I was having problems with my vision, very blurry, sometimes double vision, but it was intermittent. I went to an eye doc and she said my eyes were quite dry and irritated (probably from previous chemotherapy). I drank DMSO in a glass of juice, and within an hour my vision had improved. I did that about 3 more times, and my vision was totally normal again.

Additionally, I have also received reports of DMSO rapidly treating conjunctivitis,1,2 a conjunctival cyst, and a pterygium (which incidentally resulted from applying DMSO to the neck), and also came across a German report of it treating a pinguecula.

DMSO’s unique properties (e.g., its ability to remove edema and pathologic protein deposits) can also address a few challenging corneal issues for which there are currently no viable therapeutic options. For example:

https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/dmso-heals-the-eyes-and-transforms

My 84 year old mom suffered a grade 3 brain aneurysm and associated subarachnoid hemorrhage [and I was able to discretely give her DMSO right before she went to the hospital and a few times there]. In two weeks, she has already made nearly a complete neurological recovery, during which she made several sudden improvements that seem to come from her brain seeming to re-index several visual interpretation skills (distinguishing shadow from object or stain), or motor skills.

We have had a few cases of remarkable resolutions of glioblastomas from mebendazole. In one, the patient was virtually blind in one eye due to the tumor compressing the optic nerve and after the tumor fully disappeared following eight months of treatment, the blindness remained. I taught him about DMSO eye drops, and the very next morning, his wife texted me and said his vision had returned to normal after using the drops.

Note: a year later, that patient is still cancer free and fully able to see.

Finally, in addition to Dr. Jacob’s case, I have received one reader report of DMSO curing colorblindness:

I couldn’t tell pink from orange or red differently. They all looked almost the same in a game with colors [and I] was almost always wrong. And got laughed at a lot. Nine months ago I started putting DMSO in my eyes one drop 3 to 4 times a week. I now see the colors very well. I did an eye exam and I usually read the middle line, I read the bottom line with each eye. Thanks for having an article on DMSO and the eyes

Note: I suspect this benefit would not be seen for many types of colorblindness.

I had eye changes when taking 30 ml. DMSO internally for a few months. I’ve always been near sighted and worn glasses or contacts, but as I got older I was beginning to need bifocals. One day I noticed I couldn’t see clearly up close through my reading glasses. I thought my eyes were just getting worse and that I needed stronger lenses. To my surprise, when I took my reading glasses off, I could see the smallest print quite clearly. I’ve never needed reading glasses since. At 60 years old, I can read the tiniest print with no glasses. My nearsightedness did not get worse, and I have no cataracts, so I haven’t noticed anything negative.

My husband’s eyesight had been deteriorating steadily and quickly. He is 43 and was up to bifocals. I had just started him on selenium (600 mg of the Youngevity brand daily). He had an ingrown toenail, so I was putting DMSO on it three times daily. In two weeks, his eyes healed so much that he no longer has to use glasses except to look at things very close up (he’s farsighted).

I had just started working with DMSO in my patients, and after your EENT article came out I noticed ghosting in the right eye [due to a monocular diplopia there]. I mixed up a solution and used a couple DMSO drops in my affected eye. I woke up the next day and it was corrected. To this day, if I notice anything off with my vision, DMSO is my go to.

I have a friend who no longer needs her glasses to read texts on her phone after putting DMSO on her eyelids each night.

I use DMSO in my eyes. I’m 48 and my vision was getting worse before I started using it. I’ve always refused to wear corrective lenses too because I feel they made my vision worse. I’m no longer “night blind” and can read small print without readers. Floaters are improving too!

[After taking oral DMSO] my presbyopia disappearing was an unexpected bonus.

I just had my annual eye appointment Friday. For the first time since I was a kid, my astigmatism is gone. My distance is now 20/20 in one eye and better than 20/20 in the other. [My eye’s response to DMSO was] actually really fast. I was surprised.

My astigmatism in the left eye has improved as well. My new glasses prescription was milder than it’s been in decades!

I had an eye exam yesterday and my vision is 20/20! The astigmatism is gone in my left eye and minimal in my right!

My vision has improved from 25/40 to 20/25 and now I only use my glasses when I read in the evening.

My eyesight has improved so much I can almost ditch my contact lenses!

[After applying topical DMSO to the legs] my vision had started to become blurry. It turns out my vision had improved by .5 in my left eye and .25 in my right eye, and I needed a new contact prescription. I’m sure this is a result of my dmso use as my vision is horrible and never randomly improves.

I have been near sighted since I was early teens (L eye -2.25, R eye -1.5). Eyes have been stable since I was early 20s (I’m 36 now)…I’ve been using DMSO on and off for the last 6-8 months on my face. A few weeks ago I noticed increasing irritation from my contacts and it felt like my contacts were constantly cloudy. I went to the optometrist expecting to need a stronger prescription. To my surprise my prescription has significantly improved mostly in my L eye! (L eye -1.5, R eye -1.25). Optometrist was surprised!

>>24604565