Book: And Nothing Happened... But You Can Make It Happen! - Audio Deep Dive
Press the audio play button for a discussion of the book: And Nothing Happened...
Summary
This discussion explores overlooked health technologies and therapies in Stephen A. Ross's book, And Nothing Happened... But You Can Make It Happen.
Main Points
Exploring Alternative Health Solutions in 'And Nothing Happened'
INTRODUCTION TO ALTERNATIVE HEALTH APPROACHES
In the discussion about Stephen A. Ross's book, 'And Nothing Happened,' the hosts delve into the pressing issue of rising healthcare costs and the narrow focus of conventional medical practices. They highlight the book's central premise: that there are potentially safer and more effective medical technologies and therapies that have not been integrated into mainstream healthcare. The conversation sets the stage for exploring various alternative health solutions that have been sidelined, urging listeners to consider a broader range of options for their health.
THE BACKGROUND OF STEPHEN A. ROSS
Stephen A. Ross brings nearly four decades of experience in health research and education to his book. His extensive background includes presenting findings to government bodies and hospitals, as well as working as an expert witness. This depth of experience lends credibility to his exploration of alternative medical approaches, as he seeks to demystify these often unfamiliar therapies and technologies. Ross's goal is to empower individuals with knowledge about their health options, encouraging them to explore alternatives that may not be widely recognized.
UNPACKING THE BOOK'S CENTRAL ARGUMENT
The fundamental argument of 'And Nothing Happened' is that the current medical system may be overlooking innovative technologies that could provide safer and more effective treatments. Ross challenges readers to consider whether financial interests, professional egos, and established systems have created barriers to accessing these alternatives. By presenting these ideas clearly, the book aims to foster a sense of empowerment among readers, encouraging them to question the conventional healthcare narrative and explore different paths for their health.
EXAMPLES OF ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES
The book presents several intriguing examples of alternative therapies that have shown potential but have not gained mainstream acceptance. One notable case is Royal Rife's microscope, which claimed to identify specific frequencies that could destroy harmful microorganisms without harming surrounding tissue. Despite initial enthusiasm, Rife's work faded into obscurity due to controversy. Similarly, Dr. Bjorn Nordenström's electrical cancer therapy demonstrated success in shrinking tumors but faced resistance from the medical community. These examples illustrate the challenges faced by innovative therapies in gaining acceptance.
THE TOMATO EFFECT AND BARRIERS TO INNOVATION
Ross introduces the concept of the 'tomato effect,' which describes how new ideas can be dismissed simply because they challenge established beliefs. This phenomenon is evident in the resistance faced by alternative therapies, regardless of their potential benefits. The book discusses various barriers to innovation, including the peer review system, economic factors, and bureaucratic hurdles. These obstacles can prevent promising therapies from being recognized and integrated into standard care, highlighting the need for a more open-minded approach to health solutions.
CALL TO ACTION FOR INDIVIDUAL EMPOWERMENT
Ultimately, 'And Nothing Happened' serves as a call to action for individuals to take charge of their health. Ross emphasizes the importance of staying informed, questioning the status quo, and exploring alternative options that may not be presented by conventional healthcare providers. The book encourages readers to be proactive participants in their health journey, fostering a more inclusive and innovative approach to wellness. By doing so, individuals can advocate for a healthcare future that embraces a wider array of effective solutions.
This discussion explores overlooked health technologies and therapies in Stephen A. Ross's book, And Nothing Happened... But You Can Make It Happen.
Main Points
- Current healthcare may overlook safer, effective alternatives.
- Financial interests and established systems hinder innovation.
- Historical examples show potential in alternative therapies.
- Empowerment through knowledge is crucial for health choices.
- The book encourages questioning the status quo in healthcare.
Exploring Alternative Health Solutions in 'And Nothing Happened'
INTRODUCTION TO ALTERNATIVE HEALTH APPROACHES
In the discussion about Stephen A. Ross's book, 'And Nothing Happened,' the hosts delve into the pressing issue of rising healthcare costs and the narrow focus of conventional medical practices. They highlight the book's central premise: that there are potentially safer and more effective medical technologies and therapies that have not been integrated into mainstream healthcare. The conversation sets the stage for exploring various alternative health solutions that have been sidelined, urging listeners to consider a broader range of options for their health.
THE BACKGROUND OF STEPHEN A. ROSS
Stephen A. Ross brings nearly four decades of experience in health research and education to his book. His extensive background includes presenting findings to government bodies and hospitals, as well as working as an expert witness. This depth of experience lends credibility to his exploration of alternative medical approaches, as he seeks to demystify these often unfamiliar therapies and technologies. Ross's goal is to empower individuals with knowledge about their health options, encouraging them to explore alternatives that may not be widely recognized.
UNPACKING THE BOOK'S CENTRAL ARGUMENT
The fundamental argument of 'And Nothing Happened' is that the current medical system may be overlooking innovative technologies that could provide safer and more effective treatments. Ross challenges readers to consider whether financial interests, professional egos, and established systems have created barriers to accessing these alternatives. By presenting these ideas clearly, the book aims to foster a sense of empowerment among readers, encouraging them to question the conventional healthcare narrative and explore different paths for their health.
EXAMPLES OF ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES
The book presents several intriguing examples of alternative therapies that have shown potential but have not gained mainstream acceptance. One notable case is Royal Rife's microscope, which claimed to identify specific frequencies that could destroy harmful microorganisms without harming surrounding tissue. Despite initial enthusiasm, Rife's work faded into obscurity due to controversy. Similarly, Dr. Bjorn Nordenström's electrical cancer therapy demonstrated success in shrinking tumors but faced resistance from the medical community. These examples illustrate the challenges faced by innovative therapies in gaining acceptance.
THE TOMATO EFFECT AND BARRIERS TO INNOVATION
Ross introduces the concept of the 'tomato effect,' which describes how new ideas can be dismissed simply because they challenge established beliefs. This phenomenon is evident in the resistance faced by alternative therapies, regardless of their potential benefits. The book discusses various barriers to innovation, including the peer review system, economic factors, and bureaucratic hurdles. These obstacles can prevent promising therapies from being recognized and integrated into standard care, highlighting the need for a more open-minded approach to health solutions.
CALL TO ACTION FOR INDIVIDUAL EMPOWERMENT
Ultimately, 'And Nothing Happened' serves as a call to action for individuals to take charge of their health. Ross emphasizes the importance of staying informed, questioning the status quo, and exploring alternative options that may not be presented by conventional healthcare providers. The book encourages readers to be proactive participants in their health journey, fostering a more inclusive and innovative approach to wellness. By doing so, individuals can advocate for a healthcare future that embraces a wider array of effective solutions.
Transcript
Speaker 1:
You know, it's hard not to notice how much health care costs these days. And sometimes it feels like the standard playbook is pretty narrow.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. Mostly prescriptions and procedures. Right.
Speaker 1:
Exactly. Makes you wonder if we're maybe missing other pieces of the puzzle, other ways to approach our health that haven't quite, you know, made it into the mainstream.
Speaker 2:
Well, that's precisely the terrain we're exploring in this deep dive. We're taking a really close look at the ideas Steven A. Ross puts forward in his book: And Nothing Happened.
Speaker 1:
And Nothing Happened.
Speaker 2:
Which, by the way, you can find over at LessComplicated.net.
Speaker 1:
Right. The title definitely grabs your attention. So what's the core of this exploration? And what should we, the listener, kind of expect to take away?
Speaker 2:
Well, our aim is really to unpack the central idea of Ross's book. This notion that there are medical technologies out there, potentially safer, maybe more effective, that just haven't been integrated into conventional practice.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Speaker 2:
We're gonna look at some specific examples he brings up and, you know, try to understand the factors that might have kept these options on the sidelines.
Speaker 1:
So the book is a resource, basically, for people wanting to learn about maybe a broader range of health possibilities.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. It opens that door.
Speaker 1:
Now, Stephen A. Ross, he's clearly put in the work on this. What kind of background does he bring, to give us some context?
Speaker 2:
Oh, yeah. Ross has dedicated nearly, what, four decades researching and lecturing on health topics all over the world.
Speaker 1:
Wow.
Speaker 2:
He's presented findings to government bodies, hospitals, done tons of interviews, even worked as an expert witness and consultant.
Speaker 1:
So he's really immersed himself in this field.
Speaker 2:
Definitely. That extensive background gives a significant perspective to his exploration of these, let's call them, alternative medical approaches.
Speaker 1:
Okay. All right. Let's get into the heart of the book's argument then. What's the main idea Ross really wants to get across?
Speaker 2:
The fundamental argument of, And Nothing Happened, is basically that our current medical system might be overlooking technologies, things that have the potential to be safer and more effective than many standard treatments.
The book kind of pushes us to ask, have things like, you know, financial interests or professional egos or just established systems, have they accidentally put up barriers, prevented access to these innovations?
Speaker 1:
So the book is trying to cut through the maybe technical jargon and present these other solutions clearly and also explain why they haven't been accepted.
Speaker 2:
Precisely. Ross tries to demystify these often unfamiliar therapies and technologies, make them understandable for everyone, but also, yeah, explore the why. Why aren't they part of standard care?
Speaker 1:
Which is crucial, I guess, if you want people to feel empowered to explore different paths for their own health.
Speaker 2:
Absolutely. Knowledge is power here.
Speaker 1:
OK, let's delve into some specifics then. The book kicks off with Royal Rife's microscope, which sounds like something straight out of, I don't know, a forgotten science fiction story.
Speaker 2:
It really does have that kind of intriguing, almost legendary feel, doesn't it? Back in the 1920s, Royal Rife developed this microscope. He claimed it was way more powerful than anything else around. Ten times, the book says.
Speaker 1:
Ten.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. And the story goes that this incredible piece of tech just sort of vanished. Seriously.
Speaker 1:
Vanished. Why?
Speaker 2:
Well, the implication or the suggestion is perhaps because of the radical shift it represented. Think about it. If his approach worked, what would that mean for the pharmaceutical industry's role?
Speaker 1:
OK, so a microscope so powerful it could disrupt the whole system. What made it so revolutionary, exactly?
Speaker 2:
It wasn't just about seeing smaller things. Rife apparently observed that different germs, different microbes, seemed to have specific, unique colors under his microscope.
And that observation led him to this idea. Maybe these microorganisms could be vulnerable to specific vibratory frequencies.
Speaker 1:
Like shattering glass with sand.
Speaker 2:
Exactly that principle. The idea was targeting them with a specific frequency that could destroy them without harming surrounding tissue, you know, instead of broad spectrum drugs.
Speaker 1:
That's, yeah, a very tailored approach. And he worked with someone famous from early radio tech.
Speaker 2:
He did. Rife collaborated with Dr. Lee DeForest, the inventor of the triode vacuum tube, which was fundamental for radio.
Right. Together, they developed these therapeutic devices using frequencies based on what Rife was seeing in the microscope.
Speaker 1:
So what was the initial reaction? Did people hail it as a breakthrough right away?
Speaker 2:
Well, initially, yes. Rife's work got quite a bit of positive attention. There were reports in the Mayo Clinic, articles in big papers like the L.A. Times, even the New York Times. But that initial buzz, that enthusiasm, it eventually got drowned out by controversy. And, well, the technology basically faded from mainstream view.
Speaker 1:
So what were the potential benefits? If this microscope and the frequency stuff worked, what could it do?
Speaker 2:
Well, the microscope itself could potentially identify the exact frequencies needed to destroy specific microbes, maybe even drug resistant ones.
Speaker 1:
That's huge.
Speaker 2:
And it might have offered a way to see at a cellular level if a treatment was actually working.
The frequency rays themselves, based on those findings, were proposed as a direct way to eliminate the bugs causing all sorts of illnesses.
Speaker 1:
That's a massive departure from how we usually think about treating disease.
Okay, the book also talks about Dr. Bjorn Nordenström, electrical cancer therapy. And he was a former chairman of the Nobel Assembly.
Speaker 2:
Yes.
Speaker 1:
But faced resistance. That sounds counterintuitive.
Speaker 2:
It really is a striking example. Dr. Nordenström, holding that very prestigious position, he discovered a method using electricity, basically shrinking lung and breast cancer tumors with what were reported as minimal side effects.
Speaker 1:
With electricity.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. But despite his standing, his work was largely ignored by the wider medical world. It just highlights how even established figures can face barriers if their ideas are too different.
Speaker 1:
What was his core theory? What did he figure out about electricity in the body?
Speaker 2:
He wrote about it in his book Biologically Closed Electric Circuits. His theory was basically that bioelectromagnetic energy is fundamental in the body, especially for healing.
Speaker 1:
Like nerve impulses.
Speaker 2:
Sort of, but deeper. He believed electrical activity is essential for biological life itself, that the body has these circuits and they're crucial for repair.
Speaker 1:
So why the resistance? You'd think a Nobel chairman would get a serious listen.
Speaker 2:
Well, unfortunately, his work got pushback. Some in the medical community, some in the media. They basically labeled it alternative medicine.
Speaker 1:
That label again.
Speaker 2:
And as we see over and over in the book, that label can be a real hurdle. Doesn't matter how credible the person is sometimes.
Speaker 1:
OK, let's shift gears. This next one sounds even less conventional. Color therapy, spectro-chrome, using colored light for illness.
Speaker 2:
It might sound a bit out there now, but the book presents a really interesting historical angle. Back in the 1920s, using color therapeutically wasn't actually that uncommon.
Speaker 1:
Really?
Speaker 2:
Yeah. Ross highlights this one really dramatic case. An eight-year-old girl, Grace Sherlow, severe third degree burns. Reportedly, she recovered fully without skin grafts or the usual treatments. Just spectro-chrome color therapy.
Speaker 1:
Just colored light for third degree burns. That's incredible. Was it documented?
Speaker 2:
According to the book, yes. There was a medical report, even a journal article about it.
Speaker 1:
Wow. OK, tell us about the inventor, Dinshah Ghadiali.
Speaker 2:
Dinshah Ghadiali sounds like a fascinating character. An inventor, he apparently met Edison and Tesla, lectured widely on science stuff. He came to the U.S., had a pretty broad background.
Speaker 1:
And doctors actually used his spectro-chrome system.
Speaker 2:
Yeah, that's the thing. At one point, the book says nearly 500 U.S. medical doctors were using it and they were reporting really positive results for a whole range of conditions.
Speaker 1:
Five hundred doctors. But then what happened?
Speaker 2:
Well, success seemed to bring legal challenges. Dinshah faced a big trial, grand larceny, I think. But during the trial, many of those doctors testified under oath, said they'd successfully treated cancer, arthritis, diabetes, burns, all sorts of things with spectro-chrome.
Speaker 1:
And what was the verdict?
Speaker 2:
He was actually acquitted in that specific trial.
Speaker 1:
Yeah.
Speaker 2:
But the legal fights didn't stop there. Eventually, it led to his research being destroyed, which obviously stopped further exploration of the therapies.
Speaker 1:
So he destroyed research? That really raises eyebrows. So what's the basic idea? How is color supposed to work therapeutically?
Speaker 2:
The fundamental concept is simply that different colors of light have different effects on how the body functions. Ross gives some examples we might be more familiar with.
Speaker 1:
Like what?
Speaker 2:
Like using blue light for infant jaundice. That's standard practice.
Speaker 1:
Right.
Speaker 2:
Or, you know, how the color of walls can affect mood, maybe even test scores. Or using pink walls to calm violent prisoners. That's been documented, too.
Speaker 1:
OK, so there are examples of light affecting us physiologically.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. He also mentions Dr. McDonald's research on blue light potentially reducing pain.
So these examples, the book suggests, point towards light and color having real tangible impacts on our biology that maybe we haven't fully explored.
Speaker 1:
It makes you think. OK. The book also gets into the multiple wave oscillator, the MWO, Georges Lakhovsky.
Speaker 2:
Right. Georges Lakhovsky, back in the 1930s, he developed this device, the multiple wave oscillator. It emitted a whole spectrum of electromagnetic frequencies, but without actually touching the patient.
Speaker 1:
Interesting. He wrote a book, too.
Speaker 2:
Yes. The Secret of Life. His theory was that every living thing emits its own unique pattern of radiations or frequencies.
Speaker 1:
Living things emitting radiation. OK. How did the MWO connect with that?
Speaker 2:
Lakhovsky's idea was that when cells get diseased, their natural vibration, their frequency gets disrupted. It's like they're out of tune.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Speaker 2:
So the MWO was designed to send out a wide range of frequencies. The thinking was that the unhealthy cells could then resonate with their correct natural frequency from that broad spectrum, sort of retune themselves back to health, make them stronger than the invading bugs.
Speaker 1:
Right. Strengthening the cell's own natural state. Was there any evidence it helped?
Speaker 2:
The book mentions mostly anecdotal accounts, people reporting benefits for various physical problems, even saying it helped with meditation, not rigorous trials like today, obviously, but suggesting potential that those who used it saw.
Speaker 1:
Okay. Then there's Dr. Harold Burr's research at Yale. L-fields, fields of life. That sounds fundamental.
Speaker 2:
It really does. Dr. Harold Burr spent years meticulously documenting these invisible energy fields. He called them L-fields that surround all living organisms.
Speaker 1:
Invisible fields.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. But he found they were measurable and crucial. They seem to maintain the organism's shape, its organization throughout life.
Speaker 1:
He could measure them. How? And what did the measurements show?
Speaker 2:
Yes. He developed very sensitive techniques. And what was remarkable was he found these fields changed. They changed during growth, after injury and significantly during disease. He could apparently detect changes linked to cancer even before physical symptoms showed up.
Speaker 1:
Before symptoms. Wow.
Speaker 2:
He detailed all this in his book, Blueprint for Immortality.
Speaker 1:
So these L-fields, the idea suggests a potential early warning system for health issues. That's pretty profound.
Speaker 2:
It is. The implication is huge, right? If you monitor these fields, maybe you could spot problems way earlier.
Speaker 1:
Yeah.
Speaker 2:
Allow for proactive steps.
Speaker 1:
Definitely. Now, the book then discusses diapulse therapy, pulsed electromagnetic energy. This sounds a bit closer to some modern therapies that use energy fields.
Speaker 2:
It does have that feel. Diapulse uses pulsed, high-peak power electromagnetic energy. The idea is to accelerate the body's own healing processes.
Speaker 1:
And it was used by athletes.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. The book mentions Olympic teams using it, even names Lasseverin, the runner, who apparently credited diapulse for helping him recover from a hamstring injury quickly enough to compete and win gold medals.
Speaker 1:
Impressive. Were there actual studies?
Speaker 2:
The book does reference studies reporting positive results. Things like faster wound healing, shorter hospital stays after surgeries like tonsillectomies, even better recovery in animal studies after spinal cord injuries.
Speaker 1:
OK, so positive signs. But the book says it was banned in the U.S. That seems odd.
Speaker 2:
It does seem contradictory, doesn't it? Despite the reported benefits it's used by elite athletes, diapulse was later banned in the U.S., labeled a quack device.
It really makes you question the whole process. You know, what determines whether a potentially helpful therapy gets accepted or shut down?
Speaker 1:
Yeah, absolutely. Let's turn to another one. G-strophanthin for heart disease. Not something you hear talked about much in standard cardiology.
Speaker 2:
No, it's definitely not mainstream. Dr. Berthold Kern proposed this different way of thinking about heart attacks. Myocardial infarction.
Speaker 1:
Different how?
Speaker 2:
He suggested it wasn't just about a blocked artery. They're primarily a chemical breakdown process in the heart muscle itself caused by something called metabolic acidosis.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Speaker 2:
And he advocated using oral G-strophanthin, it comes from a West African plant, to prevent that lethal acidosis. The idea was it could reduce the incidence of heart attacks.
Speaker 1:
Was this just a theory or were doctors using it?
Speaker 2:
According to the book, yes, doctors were using it. Apparently, a significant number of physicians in Germany use G-strophanthin therapy, and the book says they reported remarkable success. Lots of positive feedback from them.
Speaker 1:
And was it safe? Expensive?
Speaker 2:
Well, it was noted as being relatively inexpensive. And the clinical reports mentioned in the book indicated minimal reported side effects.
Speaker 1:
So, OK, we've got all these examples. Rife, Nordenstrom, color therapy, MWO, L-fields, Diapulse, G-strophanthin. Therapies showing potential, often backed by doctors or researchers, yet they didn't become mainstream. Why?
The book brings up the tomato effect, right?
Speaker 2:
Yes. The tomato effect. Such a great term for it. Basically, how new ideas or therapies get rejected just because they're unfamiliar or they challenge existing beliefs, like how people used to think tomatoes were poisonous.
Speaker 1:
Right. Just because it's new and different. What other roadblocks does the book point to?
Speaker 2:
Ross outlined several. The peer review system, for one. While it's meant to ensure quality, the book suggests it can sometimes unintentionally block really innovative paradigm shifting ideas.
Speaker 1:
I could see that.
Speaker 2:
Then there are economic factors. If a new therapy is cheaper, safer and more effective, well, that could be seen as a threat to existing profitable treatments.
Speaker 1:
The wrong economics, as the book puts it.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. Plus, international barriers, language issues, maybe national biases hindering adoption of things developed elsewhere. And just cumbersome bureaucracy, like the FDA approval process, which can be long and expensive.
Speaker 1:
To really drive home this resistance point, the book tells the story of Ignaz Semmelweis. Handwashing. That's a classic, powerful example, isn't it?
Speaker 2:
Oh, it's incredibly powerful and tragic. Mid-19th century, Semmelweis figures out that if doctors just wash their hands between patients, especially after autopsies, deaths from childbed fever plummet. Seems obvious now, right?
Speaker 1:
Absolutely.
Speaker 2:
But the medical establishment rejected him, ridiculed him. He ended up dying in an asylum. It just shows how fiercely established views can resist even lifesaving changes, even when the evidence seems clear.
Speaker 1:
It's sobering. And finally, you can't really talk about modern medicine without considering the pharmaceutical industry's role. How does the book weave that in?
Speaker 2:
Well, it points to the sheer amount of money spent on marketing. Marketing to doctors, direct-to-consumer ads. It's huge.
Speaker 1:
We all see the ads.
Speaker 2:
Right. And it notes the increasing number of prescriptions Americans take. Yet the U.S. often lags behind other developed nations in health outcomes, despite spending way more.
Ross uses this analogy, like exploring a huge continent, but only ever going north, focusing research almost entirely down the pharmaceutical path, while maybe ignoring other directions.
Speaker 1:
That's a good analogy.
Speaker 2:
He also touches on legal stuff, like in California, where laws might effectively mandate conventional treatments like chemo for cancer, making it harder legally to access or even offer other approaches.
Speaker 1:
Right.
Speaker 2:
It raises the question, why are non-drug approaches often quickly dismissed or discredited, while drugs with sometimes severe side effects get approved? It's a complex issue.
Speaker 1:
So after laying all this out, what's the final message Ross wants to leave us with in And Nothing Happened?
Speaker 2:
It really comes down to a call for individual action. The book literally says "only you can make it happen."
It's about urging people to keep an open mind, to do their own research, to not be afraid to question the status quo when it comes to their health.
And the book itself, available at LessComplicated.net, is a tool for that, a starting point to learn about options maybe your doctor hasn't mentioned.
Speaker 1:
So this whole deep dive into And Nothing Happened, it really highlights the central, pretty provocative idea that there might be a whole range of potentially good health technologies and therapies that just got left behind or maybe even suppressed.
Speaker 2:
Exactly.
Speaker 1:
It definitely encourages you, the listener, to think more broadly about your own health journey and the possibilities out there.
Speaker 2:
Precisely. The book is about empowerment, helping you become a more informed, proactive participant in your own health care by showing that effective solutions might exist beyond the usual narrative.
Speaker 1:
And it really leaves us with a compelling question to chew on, doesn't it, given these examples. What other forgotten or sidelined health solutions might be out there holding real potential? And maybe more importantly, what role can each of us play in fostering a more open, more comprehensive approach to health and wellness?
Speaker 2:
It's definitely an invitation. To be curious, to keep learning and maybe to advocate for a health care future that's a bit more inclusive and innovative.
Speaker 1:
Well, if you are curious and want to explore these ideas much further, you can grab a copy of And Nothing Happened by Stephen A. Ross. It's available at lesscomplicated.net. Definitely sounds like a book that will make you think differently about your health options.
Speaker 1:
You know, it's hard not to notice how much health care costs these days. And sometimes it feels like the standard playbook is pretty narrow.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. Mostly prescriptions and procedures. Right.
Speaker 1:
Exactly. Makes you wonder if we're maybe missing other pieces of the puzzle, other ways to approach our health that haven't quite, you know, made it into the mainstream.
Speaker 2:
Well, that's precisely the terrain we're exploring in this deep dive. We're taking a really close look at the ideas Steven A. Ross puts forward in his book: And Nothing Happened.
Speaker 1:
And Nothing Happened.
Speaker 2:
Which, by the way, you can find over at LessComplicated.net.
Speaker 1:
Right. The title definitely grabs your attention. So what's the core of this exploration? And what should we, the listener, kind of expect to take away?
Speaker 2:
Well, our aim is really to unpack the central idea of Ross's book. This notion that there are medical technologies out there, potentially safer, maybe more effective, that just haven't been integrated into conventional practice.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Speaker 2:
We're gonna look at some specific examples he brings up and, you know, try to understand the factors that might have kept these options on the sidelines.
Speaker 1:
So the book is a resource, basically, for people wanting to learn about maybe a broader range of health possibilities.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. It opens that door.
Speaker 1:
Now, Stephen A. Ross, he's clearly put in the work on this. What kind of background does he bring, to give us some context?
Speaker 2:
Oh, yeah. Ross has dedicated nearly, what, four decades researching and lecturing on health topics all over the world.
Speaker 1:
Wow.
Speaker 2:
He's presented findings to government bodies, hospitals, done tons of interviews, even worked as an expert witness and consultant.
Speaker 1:
So he's really immersed himself in this field.
Speaker 2:
Definitely. That extensive background gives a significant perspective to his exploration of these, let's call them, alternative medical approaches.
Speaker 1:
Okay. All right. Let's get into the heart of the book's argument then. What's the main idea Ross really wants to get across?
Speaker 2:
The fundamental argument of, And Nothing Happened, is basically that our current medical system might be overlooking technologies, things that have the potential to be safer and more effective than many standard treatments.
The book kind of pushes us to ask, have things like, you know, financial interests or professional egos or just established systems, have they accidentally put up barriers, prevented access to these innovations?
Speaker 1:
So the book is trying to cut through the maybe technical jargon and present these other solutions clearly and also explain why they haven't been accepted.
Speaker 2:
Precisely. Ross tries to demystify these often unfamiliar therapies and technologies, make them understandable for everyone, but also, yeah, explore the why. Why aren't they part of standard care?
Speaker 1:
Which is crucial, I guess, if you want people to feel empowered to explore different paths for their own health.
Speaker 2:
Absolutely. Knowledge is power here.
Speaker 1:
OK, let's delve into some specifics then. The book kicks off with Royal Rife's microscope, which sounds like something straight out of, I don't know, a forgotten science fiction story.
Speaker 2:
It really does have that kind of intriguing, almost legendary feel, doesn't it? Back in the 1920s, Royal Rife developed this microscope. He claimed it was way more powerful than anything else around. Ten times, the book says.
Speaker 1:
Ten.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. And the story goes that this incredible piece of tech just sort of vanished. Seriously.
Speaker 1:
Vanished. Why?
Speaker 2:
Well, the implication or the suggestion is perhaps because of the radical shift it represented. Think about it. If his approach worked, what would that mean for the pharmaceutical industry's role?
Speaker 1:
OK, so a microscope so powerful it could disrupt the whole system. What made it so revolutionary, exactly?
Speaker 2:
It wasn't just about seeing smaller things. Rife apparently observed that different germs, different microbes, seemed to have specific, unique colors under his microscope.
And that observation led him to this idea. Maybe these microorganisms could be vulnerable to specific vibratory frequencies.
Speaker 1:
Like shattering glass with sand.
Speaker 2:
Exactly that principle. The idea was targeting them with a specific frequency that could destroy them without harming surrounding tissue, you know, instead of broad spectrum drugs.
Speaker 1:
That's, yeah, a very tailored approach. And he worked with someone famous from early radio tech.
Speaker 2:
He did. Rife collaborated with Dr. Lee DeForest, the inventor of the triode vacuum tube, which was fundamental for radio.
Right. Together, they developed these therapeutic devices using frequencies based on what Rife was seeing in the microscope.
Speaker 1:
So what was the initial reaction? Did people hail it as a breakthrough right away?
Speaker 2:
Well, initially, yes. Rife's work got quite a bit of positive attention. There were reports in the Mayo Clinic, articles in big papers like the L.A. Times, even the New York Times. But that initial buzz, that enthusiasm, it eventually got drowned out by controversy. And, well, the technology basically faded from mainstream view.
Speaker 1:
So what were the potential benefits? If this microscope and the frequency stuff worked, what could it do?
Speaker 2:
Well, the microscope itself could potentially identify the exact frequencies needed to destroy specific microbes, maybe even drug resistant ones.
Speaker 1:
That's huge.
Speaker 2:
And it might have offered a way to see at a cellular level if a treatment was actually working.
The frequency rays themselves, based on those findings, were proposed as a direct way to eliminate the bugs causing all sorts of illnesses.
Speaker 1:
That's a massive departure from how we usually think about treating disease.
Okay, the book also talks about Dr. Bjorn Nordenström, electrical cancer therapy. And he was a former chairman of the Nobel Assembly.
Speaker 2:
Yes.
Speaker 1:
But faced resistance. That sounds counterintuitive.
Speaker 2:
It really is a striking example. Dr. Nordenström, holding that very prestigious position, he discovered a method using electricity, basically shrinking lung and breast cancer tumors with what were reported as minimal side effects.
Speaker 1:
With electricity.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. But despite his standing, his work was largely ignored by the wider medical world. It just highlights how even established figures can face barriers if their ideas are too different.
Speaker 1:
What was his core theory? What did he figure out about electricity in the body?
Speaker 2:
He wrote about it in his book Biologically Closed Electric Circuits. His theory was basically that bioelectromagnetic energy is fundamental in the body, especially for healing.
Speaker 1:
Like nerve impulses.
Speaker 2:
Sort of, but deeper. He believed electrical activity is essential for biological life itself, that the body has these circuits and they're crucial for repair.
Speaker 1:
So why the resistance? You'd think a Nobel chairman would get a serious listen.
Speaker 2:
Well, unfortunately, his work got pushback. Some in the medical community, some in the media. They basically labeled it alternative medicine.
Speaker 1:
That label again.
Speaker 2:
And as we see over and over in the book, that label can be a real hurdle. Doesn't matter how credible the person is sometimes.
Speaker 1:
OK, let's shift gears. This next one sounds even less conventional. Color therapy, spectro-chrome, using colored light for illness.
Speaker 2:
It might sound a bit out there now, but the book presents a really interesting historical angle. Back in the 1920s, using color therapeutically wasn't actually that uncommon.
Speaker 1:
Really?
Speaker 2:
Yeah. Ross highlights this one really dramatic case. An eight-year-old girl, Grace Sherlow, severe third degree burns. Reportedly, she recovered fully without skin grafts or the usual treatments. Just spectro-chrome color therapy.
Speaker 1:
Just colored light for third degree burns. That's incredible. Was it documented?
Speaker 2:
According to the book, yes. There was a medical report, even a journal article about it.
Speaker 1:
Wow. OK, tell us about the inventor, Dinshah Ghadiali.
Speaker 2:
Dinshah Ghadiali sounds like a fascinating character. An inventor, he apparently met Edison and Tesla, lectured widely on science stuff. He came to the U.S., had a pretty broad background.
Speaker 1:
And doctors actually used his spectro-chrome system.
Speaker 2:
Yeah, that's the thing. At one point, the book says nearly 500 U.S. medical doctors were using it and they were reporting really positive results for a whole range of conditions.
Speaker 1:
Five hundred doctors. But then what happened?
Speaker 2:
Well, success seemed to bring legal challenges. Dinshah faced a big trial, grand larceny, I think. But during the trial, many of those doctors testified under oath, said they'd successfully treated cancer, arthritis, diabetes, burns, all sorts of things with spectro-chrome.
Speaker 1:
And what was the verdict?
Speaker 2:
He was actually acquitted in that specific trial.
Speaker 1:
Yeah.
Speaker 2:
But the legal fights didn't stop there. Eventually, it led to his research being destroyed, which obviously stopped further exploration of the therapies.
Speaker 1:
So he destroyed research? That really raises eyebrows. So what's the basic idea? How is color supposed to work therapeutically?
Speaker 2:
The fundamental concept is simply that different colors of light have different effects on how the body functions. Ross gives some examples we might be more familiar with.
Speaker 1:
Like what?
Speaker 2:
Like using blue light for infant jaundice. That's standard practice.
Speaker 1:
Right.
Speaker 2:
Or, you know, how the color of walls can affect mood, maybe even test scores. Or using pink walls to calm violent prisoners. That's been documented, too.
Speaker 1:
OK, so there are examples of light affecting us physiologically.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. He also mentions Dr. McDonald's research on blue light potentially reducing pain.
So these examples, the book suggests, point towards light and color having real tangible impacts on our biology that maybe we haven't fully explored.
Speaker 1:
It makes you think. OK. The book also gets into the multiple wave oscillator, the MWO, Georges Lakhovsky.
Speaker 2:
Right. Georges Lakhovsky, back in the 1930s, he developed this device, the multiple wave oscillator. It emitted a whole spectrum of electromagnetic frequencies, but without actually touching the patient.
Speaker 1:
Interesting. He wrote a book, too.
Speaker 2:
Yes. The Secret of Life. His theory was that every living thing emits its own unique pattern of radiations or frequencies.
Speaker 1:
Living things emitting radiation. OK. How did the MWO connect with that?
Speaker 2:
Lakhovsky's idea was that when cells get diseased, their natural vibration, their frequency gets disrupted. It's like they're out of tune.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Speaker 2:
So the MWO was designed to send out a wide range of frequencies. The thinking was that the unhealthy cells could then resonate with their correct natural frequency from that broad spectrum, sort of retune themselves back to health, make them stronger than the invading bugs.
Speaker 1:
Right. Strengthening the cell's own natural state. Was there any evidence it helped?
Speaker 2:
The book mentions mostly anecdotal accounts, people reporting benefits for various physical problems, even saying it helped with meditation, not rigorous trials like today, obviously, but suggesting potential that those who used it saw.
Speaker 1:
Okay. Then there's Dr. Harold Burr's research at Yale. L-fields, fields of life. That sounds fundamental.
Speaker 2:
It really does. Dr. Harold Burr spent years meticulously documenting these invisible energy fields. He called them L-fields that surround all living organisms.
Speaker 1:
Invisible fields.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. But he found they were measurable and crucial. They seem to maintain the organism's shape, its organization throughout life.
Speaker 1:
He could measure them. How? And what did the measurements show?
Speaker 2:
Yes. He developed very sensitive techniques. And what was remarkable was he found these fields changed. They changed during growth, after injury and significantly during disease. He could apparently detect changes linked to cancer even before physical symptoms showed up.
Speaker 1:
Before symptoms. Wow.
Speaker 2:
He detailed all this in his book, Blueprint for Immortality.
Speaker 1:
So these L-fields, the idea suggests a potential early warning system for health issues. That's pretty profound.
Speaker 2:
It is. The implication is huge, right? If you monitor these fields, maybe you could spot problems way earlier.
Speaker 1:
Yeah.
Speaker 2:
Allow for proactive steps.
Speaker 1:
Definitely. Now, the book then discusses diapulse therapy, pulsed electromagnetic energy. This sounds a bit closer to some modern therapies that use energy fields.
Speaker 2:
It does have that feel. Diapulse uses pulsed, high-peak power electromagnetic energy. The idea is to accelerate the body's own healing processes.
Speaker 1:
And it was used by athletes.
Speaker 2:
Yeah. The book mentions Olympic teams using it, even names Lasseverin, the runner, who apparently credited diapulse for helping him recover from a hamstring injury quickly enough to compete and win gold medals.
Speaker 1:
Impressive. Were there actual studies?
Speaker 2:
The book does reference studies reporting positive results. Things like faster wound healing, shorter hospital stays after surgeries like tonsillectomies, even better recovery in animal studies after spinal cord injuries.
Speaker 1:
OK, so positive signs. But the book says it was banned in the U.S. That seems odd.
Speaker 2:
It does seem contradictory, doesn't it? Despite the reported benefits it's used by elite athletes, diapulse was later banned in the U.S., labeled a quack device.
It really makes you question the whole process. You know, what determines whether a potentially helpful therapy gets accepted or shut down?
Speaker 1:
Yeah, absolutely. Let's turn to another one. G-strophanthin for heart disease. Not something you hear talked about much in standard cardiology.
Speaker 2:
No, it's definitely not mainstream. Dr. Berthold Kern proposed this different way of thinking about heart attacks. Myocardial infarction.
Speaker 1:
Different how?
Speaker 2:
He suggested it wasn't just about a blocked artery. They're primarily a chemical breakdown process in the heart muscle itself caused by something called metabolic acidosis.
Speaker 1:
Okay.
Speaker 2:
And he advocated using oral G-strophanthin, it comes from a West African plant, to prevent that lethal acidosis. The idea was it could reduce the incidence of heart attacks.
Speaker 1:
Was this just a theory or were doctors using it?
Speaker 2:
According to the book, yes, doctors were using it. Apparently, a significant number of physicians in Germany use G-strophanthin therapy, and the book says they reported remarkable success. Lots of positive feedback from them.
Speaker 1:
And was it safe? Expensive?
Speaker 2:
Well, it was noted as being relatively inexpensive. And the clinical reports mentioned in the book indicated minimal reported side effects.
Speaker 1:
So, OK, we've got all these examples. Rife, Nordenstrom, color therapy, MWO, L-fields, Diapulse, G-strophanthin. Therapies showing potential, often backed by doctors or researchers, yet they didn't become mainstream. Why?
The book brings up the tomato effect, right?
Speaker 2:
Yes. The tomato effect. Such a great term for it. Basically, how new ideas or therapies get rejected just because they're unfamiliar or they challenge existing beliefs, like how people used to think tomatoes were poisonous.
Speaker 1:
Right. Just because it's new and different. What other roadblocks does the book point to?
Speaker 2:
Ross outlined several. The peer review system, for one. While it's meant to ensure quality, the book suggests it can sometimes unintentionally block really innovative paradigm shifting ideas.
Speaker 1:
I could see that.
Speaker 2:
Then there are economic factors. If a new therapy is cheaper, safer and more effective, well, that could be seen as a threat to existing profitable treatments.
Speaker 1:
The wrong economics, as the book puts it.
Speaker 2:
Exactly. Plus, international barriers, language issues, maybe national biases hindering adoption of things developed elsewhere. And just cumbersome bureaucracy, like the FDA approval process, which can be long and expensive.
Speaker 1:
To really drive home this resistance point, the book tells the story of Ignaz Semmelweis. Handwashing. That's a classic, powerful example, isn't it?
Speaker 2:
Oh, it's incredibly powerful and tragic. Mid-19th century, Semmelweis figures out that if doctors just wash their hands between patients, especially after autopsies, deaths from childbed fever plummet. Seems obvious now, right?
Speaker 1:
Absolutely.
Speaker 2:
But the medical establishment rejected him, ridiculed him. He ended up dying in an asylum. It just shows how fiercely established views can resist even lifesaving changes, even when the evidence seems clear.
Speaker 1:
It's sobering. And finally, you can't really talk about modern medicine without considering the pharmaceutical industry's role. How does the book weave that in?
Speaker 2:
Well, it points to the sheer amount of money spent on marketing. Marketing to doctors, direct-to-consumer ads. It's huge.
Speaker 1:
We all see the ads.
Speaker 2:
Right. And it notes the increasing number of prescriptions Americans take. Yet the U.S. often lags behind other developed nations in health outcomes, despite spending way more.
Ross uses this analogy, like exploring a huge continent, but only ever going north, focusing research almost entirely down the pharmaceutical path, while maybe ignoring other directions.
Speaker 1:
That's a good analogy.
Speaker 2:
He also touches on legal stuff, like in California, where laws might effectively mandate conventional treatments like chemo for cancer, making it harder legally to access or even offer other approaches.
Speaker 1:
Right.
Speaker 2:
It raises the question, why are non-drug approaches often quickly dismissed or discredited, while drugs with sometimes severe side effects get approved? It's a complex issue.
Speaker 1:
So after laying all this out, what's the final message Ross wants to leave us with in And Nothing Happened?
Speaker 2:
It really comes down to a call for individual action. The book literally says "only you can make it happen."
It's about urging people to keep an open mind, to do their own research, to not be afraid to question the status quo when it comes to their health.
And the book itself, available at LessComplicated.net, is a tool for that, a starting point to learn about options maybe your doctor hasn't mentioned.
Speaker 1:
So this whole deep dive into And Nothing Happened, it really highlights the central, pretty provocative idea that there might be a whole range of potentially good health technologies and therapies that just got left behind or maybe even suppressed.
Speaker 2:
Exactly.
Speaker 1:
It definitely encourages you, the listener, to think more broadly about your own health journey and the possibilities out there.
Speaker 2:
Precisely. The book is about empowerment, helping you become a more informed, proactive participant in your own health care by showing that effective solutions might exist beyond the usual narrative.
Speaker 1:
And it really leaves us with a compelling question to chew on, doesn't it, given these examples. What other forgotten or sidelined health solutions might be out there holding real potential? And maybe more importantly, what role can each of us play in fostering a more open, more comprehensive approach to health and wellness?
Speaker 2:
It's definitely an invitation. To be curious, to keep learning and maybe to advocate for a health care future that's a bit more inclusive and innovative.
Speaker 1:
Well, if you are curious and want to explore these ideas much further, you can grab a copy of And Nothing Happened by Stephen A. Ross. It's available at lesscomplicated.net. Definitely sounds like a book that will make you think differently about your health options.