Connect with us

Health & Society

French anti-cult law proposes to criminalise natural health

Published

on

Vote on 19 December will decide the future of alternative medicine in France.

Next week in France, the parliament will decide whether or not to support a law that grants authorities the power to criminalise those who criticise or avoid conventional medical practices deemed ‘essential’, or use or promote natural or alternative medicines instead. Macron’s government plans to implement these powers by amending existing French law on sectarian drift which will be discussed and voted on by the French Parliament next Tuesday, 19 December.

If passed, individuals or organisations prosecuted under the new law will face jail sentences of between 1 and 3 years, and fines of between 15,000 and 45,000 euros.

The proposed change in law comes by way of amendments to a long-standing law intended to protect people from sectarian abuses, including terrorism and female genital mutilation.

It has been motivated by concerns expressed by French medical bodies and the government agency tasked with fighting so-called sectarian aberrations, the Interministerial Mission of Vigilance and Combat against Sectarian Drifts, Miviludes.

The Explanatory Memorandum for the proposed amendments asserts: “The [covid-19] health crisis provided an ideal breeding ground for these new sectarian excesses. New forms of “gurus” or self-proclaimed thought leaders act online, taking advantage of the vitality of social networks to unite real communities around them.”

Robert Verkerk PhD, founder, executive and scientific director of the Alliance for Natural Health International, said that the bill, No. 111 (2023-2034) of the French Penal Code “represents probably the most blatant legal attack on the practice of alternative and natural medicine anywhere in the world.” He continued, “If passed into law, those who speak out about the dangers of pharmaceuticals or vaccines and use alternatives will be declared sectarian deviants and will be turned into criminals.”

Legal experts suggest the proposed law would violate France’s Declaration of Human and Civic Rights of 1789, in which article 11 protects the right to freedom of expression. It would also infringe a rash of international conventions, including the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 18), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Articles 2, 3, 7, 8, 12 and 18-20), the European Convention of Human Rights (Articles 9-11), the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Articles 6, 7 and 10-13), the Oviedo Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (1997) (Articles 2-6 and 10), and the Helsinki Final Act (1975) (Sections II and VII).

Professor Christian Perronne MD PhD, a former member of the European Technical Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (ETAGE) of the WHO Regional Office, who was himself fully exonerated of all charges made by French medical bodies who challenged him when he criticised the government’s health policies during the covid pandemic, expressed his grave concerns for the bill.

In a recent article that he published on the BonSens association’s website, he said, “This law would make it possible to violently suppress what little freedom of expression remains in our beautiful, battered country. This would be a crime against science which can only progress through debate of ideas….This law would establish a de facto obligation to receive pharmaceutical substances, even experimental ones, against one’s will….This would be a violation of international conventions.”

French former presidential candidate, current member of parliament and president of the Debout la France party, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, stated in a 42 minute video on the subject that, if the law is passed, “medical freedom in France is finished” and it will “call into question” the Hippocratic Oath.

Senator Alain Houpert has proposed the deletion of Article 4, the key amendment that targets unconventional health practices.

While breaching a clutch of international conventions, the new bill appears to pre-empt proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) that aim to cede control over “public health emergencies”, and responses to threats of such emergencies, from individual nations to the World Health Organisation. These amendments will be voted on at the 77th World Health Assembly next May.

The Alliance for Natural Health is urging French citizens, parliamentarians and those among the international community who are respectful of human rights and medical ethics to lobby the French parliament with the aim, at least, of ensuring Senator Houpert’s amendment to block Article 4 is supported.

To do otherwise would be a travesty to both human rights and medical ethics and will create even further sectarian divisions in French society.

Legal procedure

https://www.senat.fr/dossier-legislatif/pjl23-111.html

Article by Professor Christian Perronne on BonSens.org

Est-on en guerre contre les droits du peuple ?

Statement by Nicolas Dupont-Aignan

Extensive article by Robert Verkerk PhD, founder, executive & scientific director, Alliance for Natural Health International

https://www.anhinternational.org/news/french-anti-cult-law-proposes-to-criminalise-natural-health/

ABOUT THE ALLIANCE FOR NATURAL HEALTH www.anheurope.org www.anhinternational.org

Alliance for Natural Health (ANH) Europe is the European, Netherlands-based, non-profit office linked to the ANH International. ANH International is an independent, non-profit organisation founded in 2002 in the UK by acclaimed sustainability scientist, Robert Verkerk PhD. Its mission is to promote and protect natural, sustainable and regenerative approaches to health optimisation worldwide, through the application of good science and good law.

We work to help health systems to transition from their current pre-occupation with the
management of ‘downstream’ diseases to ‘upstream’ approaches that maintain and
regenerate health. ANH International advocates for properly informed consent, the right for citizen choice in healthcare and the right to practise a diverse range of modalities incorporating natural health. It supports individual empowerment, medical autonomy, the rule of law, and respect for, and the protection of, the natural environment.

We seek to increase the adoption of clinically validated, natural and sustainable approaches, taking into account cultural and individual needs and choices. The threat of legal and scientific uncertainty, as well as regulatory and corporate pressure, continues to limit freedom of choice in the field of natural health.

As an international alliance, we collaborate with a diverse cross-section of natural and environmental interests around the world, including scientists, lawyers, medical doctors, other health professionals, politicians, companies and, above all, the public.

Author

Health & Society

EU treading Dangerous Waters: The Perils of Psychedelics in Therapeutic Use

Published

on

The European Commission is getting ready to review citizens’ proposals and one controversial idea on the table is the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative that supports the exploration and implementation of psychedelic treatments for mental wellbeing issues. Advocates of this initiative highlight the advantages of using psychedelics in addressing mental health concerns; however it’s crucial to carefully assess the consequences of making these substances mainstream for therapeutic use, it already happened with way too many “pharma products” and end up being dangerous street drugs, as this is what they actually were from the beginning.

The Illusory Promise of Psychedelics

Supporters of this “therapies” frequently promote these substances as amazing remedies for profound mental health challenges like depression and anxiety disorders such as PTSD are regularly highlighted by them in support of their claims. However, these early research findings are willfully misinterpreted and exaggerated. The “positive outcomes” observed in limited research studies do not automatically translate to safety and effectiveness across wider and more varied demographic groups, often the contrary. Throughout history the fascination with a quick fix for mental health issues has often resulted in disappointment and harm, if not death.

A Lack of Comprehensive Understanding

The insufficient scientific knowledge about psychedelics raises concerns within the community as the intricate workings of the human brain remain a mystery when influenced by these substances. There are risks such as psychological distress and worsening of preexisting mental health conditions that make it unthinkable to integrate psychedelics into mainstream therapy practices at all. It is crucial to acknowledge the variations in individual experiences and biological compositions to prevent unintended harm rather than aiding in treatment efforts.

Regulatory and Ethical Concerns

The push for government endorsement of psychedelic therapies raises numerous ethical questions. Should substances with known psychoactive properties be part of mainstream health care? The regulatory environment surrounding these compounds is fraught with challenges, including ensuring quality control, standardizing dosages, and preventing misuse. With the legalization movements in various regions, the potential for recreational abuse expands, risking public health and safety.

Historical Context and Social Implications

Looking back, the late 1960s and early 1970s were marked by a psychedelic counterculture that resulted in societal turmoil and increased drug abuse. The legacy of this era still looms large; many young individuals romanticize psychedelic use without regarding the severe consequences that accompanied its earlier popularity, including addiction, mental health crises, and a societal disregard for safety protocols.

A Dangerous Precedent

By calling for a more prominent role for psychedelics in treatment protocols, the advocates of the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative may unintentionally set a dangerous precedent. Replacing established, evidence-based treatments with unproven psychedelic therapies could detract from the very real progress made in mental health care. It could shift focus away from holistic approaches that consider lifestyle, therapeutic counseling, and medication tailored to individual needs.

Conclusion

The debate surrounding the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative should prompt a vigilant and cautious examination of the implications of endorsing psychedelics as treatment options. While there is a critical need for innovative approaches in mental health care, rushing to embrace unproven therapies poses significant risks. It is paramount that we prioritize rigorous scientific scrutiny, ethical considerations, and the well-being of individuals over the allure of quick solutions. The only clear path forward is one grounded in proven therapies, comprehensive research, and unwavering commitment to public health.

Author

Continue Reading

Health & Society

Why chocolate should not be given to dogs

Published

on

Chocolate is a favorite delicacy for people, but for cats and dogs it is a real poison, writes the magazine ” Sciences et Avenir” and explains why pets should not be “pampered” with chocolate under any circumstances.

For them, chocolate is toxic, because it is not properly absorbed by their body. This is due to the alkaloid theobromine, which is contained in cocoa and therefore in chocolate.

The substance becomes dangerous to health when large amounts of it are stored in the liver. About 12 grams of theobromine are contained in dark chocolate, twice as much in milk chocolate, and very small amounts in white chocolate.

Theobromine does not harm humans, as the human body manages to break it down quickly.

However, it takes 20 hours for dogs to get rid of this molecule. It can build up in their liver and cause poisoning if large amounts of chocolate are ingested at once.

Among the symptoms are vomiting, diarrhea, rapid pulse, convulsions.

The same is true for cats. However, they are less attracted to chocolate than dogs because they cannot taste sweets with their tongues, although there are exceptions.

In addition, pet obesity is the subject of a number of educational campaigns aimed at owners.

A court in North West England has banned a British man from keeping pets for the next 10 years because his Dalmatian became too fat. wrote the English tabloid “Sun” in November 2009.

40-year-old man John Green, a resident of Macclesfield in Cheshire, showed extreme irresponsibility towards his dog Barney and fed him chips and chocolate.

Thus, in just three months, it became several times fatter than normal for its breed and reached 70 kg.

Green was tipped off by alarmed, vigilant fellow citizens.

Animal control officials warned Green that his dog’s health was in danger and recommended that he be put on a diet.

However, he did not follow the recommendations and the dog continued to gain weight.

The Dalmatian was eventually removed from his owner’s home in June and put on a diet in a private kennel, where staff made sure he got enough exercise.

As a result, Barney, who is eight years old, lost 40 kg.

Green pleaded guilty to causing his dog unnecessary suffering, but the court found some mitigating circumstances because the man treated Barney more like a friend than a dog and did not realize he was harming him.

That’s why Green was only sentenced to 200 hours of community service and to pay £780 in costs.

Illustrative Photo by Glenn: https://www.pexels.com/photo/high-angle-photo-of-a-corgi-looking-upwards-2664417/

Author

Continue Reading

Health & Society

Russian Orthodox Church calls on mass culture to abandon ‘images promoting alcoholism’

Published

on

On the occasion of the Day of Sobriety celebrated in the country today, the Russian Orthodox Church called on mass culture not to promote alcoholism, TASS reported.

The agency recalls that the All-Russian Day of Sobriety is celebrated on the initiative of the Russian Orthodox Church on September 11 to remind people of the harm caused by alcohol. On this day, in some parts of Russia, the sale of alcohol is limited or completely prohibited.

“The culture of attitude towards this is very important. There are many “nice jokes” about alcoholism in our everyday culture. There is nothing good about that. We know what the state of intoxication leads to. Those who deal with mass culture should make an effort that the image of the “dear drunkard” should still leave our mass culture,” said the head of the synodal department of the Moscow Patriarchate for Church Interaction on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg Forum of United Cultures with society and media Vladimir Legoida.

Asked whether it would be appropriate to ban or restrict the sale of alcohol across the country, he said “that would be wonderful”. “But it is important that people do this consciously, independently, not because someone is forcing them, and also that there is, as it is customary to say, a public consensus,” he stated.

Legoida noted that the category of “sobriety” is important for the church in general, which refers not only to abstinence from alcohol.

Meanwhile, during a press conference dedicated to the All-Russian Day of Sobriety, Russia’s Deputy Health Minister Oleg Salagai said that alcohol abuse can reduce a man’s life expectancy by six years and a woman by five years.

“The systemic measures that were adopted allowed us to really reduce alcohol consumption. Today, it can be confidently said that Russia is not one of the most drinking countries in the world,” said the deputy minister, who pointed out that in 2023 alcohol consumption in the country was about 8.4 liters per person, while at the beginning of the century the indicator was in double digits.

Illustrative Photo by EVG Kowalievska: https://www.pexels.com/photo/selective-focus-photography-of-assorted-brand-liquor-bottles-1128259/

Author

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2023 EuroTimes

Exit mobile version