I have received a Whatsapp message today from a journalist for the Sunday Times called Shanti Das. Interestingly, this is the same journalist who was behind the hit-piece on Professor Christopher Exley from Keele university a few weeks ago. The professor was investigating links between autism and aluminium toxicity. Since the article was published his research funding has been withdrawn. Job done.
Someone REALLY doesn’t want the link between autism & aluminium being investigated. Can anyone guess why? (on an unrelated note, the family that owns the Sunday Times also own QUITE a lot of shares in pharmaceutical companies. I’m sure this is just a coincidence)
I will not be giving this journalist a statement. She has demonstrated that she is acting in bad faith. Instead, I’ll answer her statements, questions and accusations here on my own blog where no newspaper editor can manipulate them for their own agenda.
You claim to ‘cure’ autism
Firstly, I don’t claim to be able to ‘cure’ autism. It’s an absurd statement as ‘autism’ is a great big umbrella term covering many different symptoms. In recent years many things have been added under this diagnosis. In the past, a socially awkward computer geek with a few quirks that builds a multi-million dollar software company might have been labelled as ‘aspergers’, now he’s lumped under ‘autism’. Right along with the 24 year old man in 24/7 residential care still in nappies (diapers), who needs sedation, anticonvulsants and psychiatric medications to control his anger and seizures. This young man is non-verbal and spends his days screeching and flicking his fingers, totally cut off from the world. He doesn’t have any capacity for self-care and appears not to recognise his own family when they come to visit. Do you see how absurd putting these two young men under the same umbrella is?
The piece (which hasn’t been published yet) will likely allude to autism being nothing more than ‘neuro-diversity’, just different ways that people’s brains are wired. If this is all it is, then logically I’m clearly a fraud, deranged or deluded for claiming to help anyone.
But does this ‘neuro-diversity’ narrative reflect reality? Listen to parent’s testimonies of their perfectly happy baby meeting every milestone until 14 months old, then ‘the lights went out’. Speech stopped, eye-contact stopped, chronic constipation and unbearable tummy pain began. Or the other stories of parents who have made incredible progress through biomedical interventions, or something as simple as a change of diet. Does this sound like ‘neuro-diversity’ to any sane person?
I ‘treat’ autism. This is a very different statement to claiming to ‘cure’. I offer no guarantees, but many of the 1185 (at last count) children that I’ve treated have derived significant benefit from homeopathy. Instead of making potentially libellous accusations, perhaps actual journalism should involve investigating some of my cases and talking to some of my former patients? There’s an incredible story to be told here, unfortunately the mainstream media have an agenda to push, so that story won’t be told in the Sunday Times any time soon.
Your treatments are untested and may be harmful
The homeopathic remedies that I prescribe have been tested for 200 years. They have been tested by many thousands of homeopaths on millions of patients. They are un-patented medicines, anyone is free to buy them and conduct whatever tests they feel like. What they haven’t been through is some sort of expensive medicine licensing procedure. Anti-homeopathy campaigners have tried in the past to restrict the public’s access to homeopathic remedies by attempting to insist that every remedy (there are 5000+) undergoes this licensing. The plan is brilliant in its simplicity…the remedies, as said earlier, are un-patented so there would be no profit in spending £400,000 or £500,000 licensing each one. The result would be that no remedies would get licensed and homeopathy would cease. Luckily the government disagreed (because homeopathy has proven itself an incredibly safe system of medicine for two centuries), homeopathic remedies continue to be freely available at homeopathic pharmacies, and the manufacture of homeopathic remedies in the UK is strictly regulated by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
How could the remedies conceivably be ‘harmful’? It appears the journalists/propagandists are walking a tightrope here. They have to claim BOTH that there’s no evidence that homeopathic remedies could have any effect because they don’t contain any active ingredients AND that the remedies are potentially dangerous because they contain (and I quote) ‘biohazardous materials which may still present a risk after dilution’. It’s a confusing statement to unpick, don’t you agree?! They could claim that the remedies are being manufactured incorrectly, I suppose, and are ending up contaminated with harmful materials. But this is just an assertion presented without any evidence (the quality of journalism here in the UK is dire, as you can see!).
All the remedies that I prescribe are purchased directly by my patients from well known homeopathic pharmacies. These are all registered pharmacies staffed by qualified pharmacists and homeopaths. They are also monitored closely by the General Pharmaceutical Council, and the MHRA (medicines and healthcare products regulatory agency). Any issues around the safety of the homeopathic remedies fall under the purview of the pharmacies that manufacture them. Note: As far as I’m aware there hasn’t been a single case in the UK of anything being found untoward in any remedy manufactured by the pharmacies. Homeopathy is just incredibly safe medicine.
You are not registered with any UK society of homeopaths.
Yes this is true. I think this might be the first accurate, unbiased statement from our young journo. Though we can see WHY she makes this statement, the implication here is that I’m somehow a maverick outside the law, operating illegally and generally not to be trusted (see, told you it was a propaganda piece). The fact is, there’s no statutory requirement for me to be registered with a registering body. I have both a bachelor of science degree and a licentiate in homeopathy, but choose for the time being to not be affiliated with the Society of Homeopaths. I operate completely legally within UK law. Note, since writing this article, I have become a member of HINT (Homeopathy International).
The remedies you are prescribing are putting patients at risk
What an incredible accusation from a journalist with clearly no understanding of either homeopathy or my work. Is she alluding to these imaginary ‘biohazardous materials’ that she has no evidence of again? I’m genuinely confused. Ah…I’ve put my cynical hat on, NOW I see what she’s doing. She’s putting statements like this in the piece so the readers will be alarmed and think there’s a risk. Again, what an appalling standard of journalism. This is just propaganda.
Patients have presented with extreme side effects such as rashes, vomiting, diarrhoea, fever…
Our journo has been reading my website I see. Good, gotta keep those views up as my site STILL hasn’t recovered from the malicious hack a few months ago. Let’s pick apart her statement. ‘Side effect’: How can a homeopathic remedy have a ‘side effect’, there’s no active ingredient! Any effect we observe will be (can ONLY be) the body itself reacting energetically to the remedy. Notice how she cherry picks ‘extreme’ things like fever from my website, but then fails to mention that after the fever the child started babbling again, or their eye contact returned, or their hyperactivity decreased by 90%. In other words, she took something out of context in an attempt to discredit me. How can these journalists be so dishonest in their reporting?
How can you offer a cure despite no scientific evidence autism is curable?
Again, I don’t claim that I offer a cure. However I DO claim that homeopathy can do AMAZING things for these autistic kids. We can help get them back on their life path. At this point I don’t have much faith in the ‘scientific evidence’ route. This is the same journalist, remember, that did a hit piece on the professor investigating the role aluminium toxicity plays in autism. In other words, she’s actively working to suppress any scientific evidence that would challenge the current consensus.
I’m sure there will be other wild claims or accusations made. I haven’t seen the piece yet. Hopefully I will have covered the main points that she will bring up. If not, I might write a second piece if I feel it necessary.
On a side note, I’m slightly concerned about what effect all this media attention is going to have on my privacy and safety. Already a Twitter mob has: Hacked & shut down my website, left fake reviews on Google and Facebook, left defamatory voicemails, text messages, and emails, reported me to the ASA, the local police, my local M.P, the MHRA, Trading Standards, the local city council, attacked the lady that built my website, posted my home address and pictures of my house etc.
The goal with all this intimidation is of course for me to shut up and stop talking about the work that I’m doing, to scare me into silence. Anyone who knows me might also know that I have a stubborn streak, so they’ll not stop me. In fact when I meet resistance like this, it just lets me know I’m on the right path. Saying this, I’m considering ‘going dark’ and making it much harder for people to know where I am. Unfortunately this might mean stopping patient’s visiting me in my office. Ultimately it might even mean moving countries and only accepting crypto-currency for payment, but I hope that this drastic step won’t be necessary.
Please share a link to this post with anyone that wants to hear my rebuttal to the Sunday Times piece. Thank you.
Here’s a copy of the Whatsapp message that I received from the Sunday Times journalist Shanti Das:
“My name is Shanti Das and I’m a reporter getting in touch from the Sunday Times.
We are preparing an article for this weekend’s newspaper about homeopathic remedies being offered as a “cure” for autism. This comes after we learned that you are offering treatments that have been untested and may be harmful.
The Sunday Times understands that:
-You claim that autism can be cured using homeopathic remedies and say you have treated 1,200 autistic patients to date
-The remedies that you have prescribed to children as young as three include Carcinosinum, Lyssinum, Medorrhinum and nux vomica
-You also prescribe vaccine detoxes that you say can help undo the “damage” caused by vaccines, which you claim cause autism
-You are not registered with any UK society of homeopaths
-The remedies you are prescribing are putting patients at risk. They contain biohazardous materials which may still present a risk after dilution
-Patients have presented with extreme side effects such as rashes, vomiting, diarrhoea and fever. You claim these symptoms are not dangerous and are proof that the remedy is working.
-What is your response to the above points?
-Why are you offering cures for autism despite there being no credible scientific evidence that autism is curable?
-What is your response to the claim that the remedies you are prescribing contain potentially harmful ingredients and may be putting patients at risk?
We will be running an article on Sunday. If you wish to comment on the above points, please get back to me via email, on WhatsApp or call me on xxxxxxx as soon as possible.
Reporter, the Sunday Times”