It is understandable that a medicinal drug having undergone double blind studies, several years of research, and millions of dollars spent on that research, should have a place of credibility. But what if the entire system was flawed to begin with, money and time wasted on treating a symptom rather than working to find a cure or better yet, prevention of the disease? Or what if the system was more than flawed but in many cases left the person in a less healthy state after having completed treatment using a pharmaceutical drug? With all of our knowledge about how the human body works, knowing its intolerance of unnatural elements, why are we, as medical patients, so accepting of the idea that we should be treating ourselves with synthetic drugs that are virtually poison to our body? To relieve one symptom we acquire two or three new symptoms, a new chronic condition we need to deal with and, of course, another prescription medication to fill each month.

Of course, those involved in the area of holistic medicine can never claim to prevent, cure, or treat a disease, even if that is the intended outcome and regardless of the numerous individuals finding themselves to be in a state of improved health. Only drug companies can make such claims. In fact, they own those words. Whether or not that right is deserved is irrelevant. It is worth noting that most natural supplements have endured centuries of product testing.

» Read more: Natural Therapies vs. Pharmaceutical Drugs: The Politics of Surviving Cancer