The rejection of the cost reimbursement "not generally scientifically recognized" natural health is unlawful by health insurance. It violates the Constitution's principle of freedom of method, the rights of patients and against the law. The concept of "academic recognition" is unscientific and illogical, naive and arbitrary and legally irrelevant and futile. At the school "medicine", there is still no scientific definitions of "disease" and "health". The modern, conventional, commercial school "medicine" is not "medicine" nor "science"!
The legal situation
In the Supreme Court rulings of 02 12th 1981 (Az IVa ZR 206/80) and 23 06th 1993 (Az IV ZR 135/93), relating to the reimbursement of the cost of alternative, naturopathic diagnostic and therapeutic procedures by private funds, represents the Federal Court of the (correct) view that the arbitrarily from school "medical" side coined the term "academic recognition" for the relevant case law does not (authentic) was. Each type of medical treatment, whether "scientifically accepted" or not, have an experimental character (sic). This means nothing else than that the concept of "academic recognition" any legal basis (and logic) lacks and arrogant, arrogant claim of self-proclaimed "experts" and "experts" from the ranks of the "orthodox medicine" and health insurance, high-handedly to decide what would be "scientifically valid" and what does not in law, irrelevant and de void and must be rejected.
The Federal Social Court had already decades ago means the health insurance companies that insured the reimbursement of the cost of alternative, naturopathic diagnostic and therapeutic methods including herbal remedies for diseases must not be refused on the ground that they were not (yet) "generally accepted scientific" (ESR, 07th 11th 1979, Az RVI 9 2 / 78). And the Supreme Administrative Court of Münster, wrote in his statement of identical sentence of 06 07th 1982 (Az 12 A 1734/80) that "" not the "general acceptance, but the practical experience gained from the therapist's conviction decision." For "if" the "scientific recognition is still pending, it is not impossible that it takes place in the future."
Thus corresponds to the case (of course) the principle of freedom of method, which is guaranteed in the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany: "Art and science, research and teaching are free." (Article 5, paragraph 3 GG), and follows the specification of the Supreme Court: "The general or far most" recognized "rules of medical" science "basically enjoy no privileged position in front of the" from "science rejected cures doctors 'outsiders' or non-medical health practitioner." (RGSt 67, page 22)
"The postulate of freedom courier is not mere lip of the legislature and the judiciary. For good reason for rejecting a claim sole representation of the medical school and they acknowledge a pluralism of methods. This attitude is justified not only in errors and mistakes of conventional medicine, (...) but "even in undeniable healing successes of" outsiders. "(Prof. Dr. jur. Backes, Judge of the District Court of Bremen," Medical Law "No. 6 / 1982)
The notorious refusal to reimburse the statutory and private health insurance, the cost of alternative, naturopathic remedies and cures, is illegal, therefore criminal. Their appeal to a so-called "scientific" clause would not after the power requirement for "not scientifically recognized" for examination and treatment methods and medicines, is irrelevant in law and void, and on top of that absurd and illogical.
The factual situation
The modern school "medicine" refers to himself as "orthodox", "classic", "Medicine" and "science", Nature Medicine describes them - at best, and "generous" - as "alternative" and "complementary". This is wrong, absurd and ridiculous (apart from the arrogance and hubris):
The term "medicine" is about Latin medicina, from ars medicina: art of medicine to medicinus: for medicine to heal properly, from medicus: doctor, herbalist, is derived. The real meaning is "discretion". It is therefore an error-free, relatively optimal discretionary decision of the herbal remedies for healers also possible after an error-free, relatively optimal diagnosis. "Discretion" but has "science (sensitivity) to do" anything! This in turn means that medicine is not science! Medicine is more a (very high) art!
Dokein to opinion, belief: The terms "orthodox" and "orthodoxy" comes on the medieval Latin Orthodoxus and ancient Greek orthodoxos: orthodox and Orthodoxia: Right, right belief, true opinion of the two ancient Greek words orthos: true, correct, and doxa watch, my believe, from, and mean "orthodox" and "orthodoxy". (Also here is no question of "knowledge"!) The opposite is the "heterodoxy," the otherness / false belief, the misconception that heresy (from Greek heteros: different).
The term "classical" comes from Latin classicus: exemplary, masterfully, belonging to the first class, of classis: class, and has three meanings: 1 the Greco-Roman antiquity on, antique, second the era of classical music at the Arts and on third the top form on a certain area on masterful, perfect example, is completed.
It is now clear: the modern school "medicine" is neither orthodox (right-meaning) nor classical (exemplary) nor medicine (art) nor science. It is in fact heterodox (based on a misconception), conventional (based on an agreement within a pseudo-elitist group) and commercial (motivated by profit). Solely the experience of medicine, natural medicine has been proven to "healing" (Medicine), "classical" and "orthodox".
Natural medicine is the classic, orthodox medicine! The modern, conventional, commercial school "medicine" is - at best! - Subordinate, 'alternative' and complementary (supplementary)! Also here is - as always and everywhere - again everything turned upside down.
True, true, real "medicine" is not "science", but an art - the art of healing, thus "healing" - because life is not possible to calculate: the man is not a machine, the cell is not an automaton, and the DNA is no control panel. Therefore there is a crucial difference and diametrical opposition between modern doctors and herbal remedies for sickness offered by traditional healers (healers, shamans, medicine men, herbal "witch", midwives, women have, etc.) ". Medicus curat, natura Sanat" ("maintains the physician / provides that nature heals "[Paracelsus1)])
"Sciences" in the true sense of the word philosophy (the "queen and mother of sciences"), mathematics, chemistry and physics (so were the great classical philosophers and scientists ever!). On the steps of the so-called "science" is the modern school "medicine" on a par with the geography (geography) and history (history). Therefore, the school "medicine" never a proof (a priori) provide, at best, if any, evidence (à posteriori). Synthetic judgments a priori (evidence) are as principles (objective criteria) contained in all theoretical sciences (and only in them). (See Immanuel Kant2): "How are synthetic judgments a priori possible?" Prolegomena [Ancient Greek: preface, introduction] to any future metaphysics, 1783. [Therapy After Jean-Claude Alix, Solingen, and philosopher Norbert Knobloch, Wuppertal])
In the conventional school "medicine" is for precisely this reason is still no scientific definitions of "health" and "disease"! George Wannagat has in his textbook of social security law, Volume I, explicitly stated and expressly stated that the term "disease" only in the form of a legal abstraction corresponding wrapped-been, so only a purely legal purpose of creation is (comparable to the term " legal person "). As such, it has been introduced in the Medicines Act of 1976.
Irrationality, reductionism, dogmatism and irrationality
Nevertheless insists the modern school "medicine" stubborn in their causal-analytical irrationalism, and mechanical, schematic reductionism: A disease must be explained by hook or by crook from an organ-pathological findings can - otherwise it makes it not as a "disease" are. What remains then is a purely symptomatic treatment (reduction of symptoms) with drugs - a path to a dead end: the causes are not corrected, the disease becomes chronic. From the harmful, often fatal, sometimes fatal "side effects" of drugs not to mention yet.
With the arbitrary, illogical concept of "generally accepted scientific method" - a contradiction in terms (see below) - is a general validity and claim sole representation of the school "medicine" is postulated. Rejected another method and another method will also apply if, literally, "has been achieved in individual cases, a treatment success' (sic)! The so-called "scientific acceptance" therefore has priority over the healing of the sick! This is contrary ("First and foremost, do not hurt") against the Hippocratic maxim of "primum nil nocere" and "aegroti salus suprema lex" ("The salvation of the patient is paramount"), which have been almost reversed. And it is against the law:
A doctor makes it illegal for a man in his absence or failure of conventional methods or agents can not bestow the help of alternative means and methods! (§ 323 c StGB: "Failure to assistance") And just as the funds / insurance companies liable to prosecution.
It also violates the Hippocratic Eid3), who has since degenerated into a "justiciable perjury" (Prof. Dr. Julius Hackethal4) [†]): "My ordinances, I'll take the benefit of the sick according to my ability and sentence and Keep them harm and injustice. "A more cynical hypocrisy, a ruthless chutzpah is no longer conceivable.
The arbitrary concept of "academic recognition" is merely an instrument of education "medicine": he is the elimination of competition and the establishment of a monopoly - for profit. But there is no primacy of a particular doctrine (teaching us), no monopoly on a specific procedure. And nowhere is it written that the necessary service to the sick had to be a doctor! Fully cures and herbal remedies or even ban, that no harm and efficacy are proven empirically (such as at the heart of agent strophanthin and the cancer drug laetrile), simply because the "scientific proof" (yet) can provide definitive, Apart from the malicious wantonness and arrogance of the arrogant, stupid and embarrassing too: the problem lies in the obvious inadequacy of the then existing school-"scientific" proof methods ...! Also: the effect of the applied for over 100 years allopathic medicine aspirin could be explained scientifically only in recent times, yet it was "approved" and "recognized"!
Apart from the "truth" of the school "science" is usually just before the current state of the now recognized (!) Mistake of tomorrow. This presumes the school "medicine" that is at an apparent competence, perceived legitimacy of authority and alleged that they did not have. "Scientific" it is anyway (see above), and the term is certainly not:
"Recognition", even on a "general" professional border, is clearly linked with opinion, valuation and rating. Opinions and value judgments, but have no place in real, not real science! In addition come the concepts of "general recognition" and "Science (sensitivity)" different categories. In naive, incorrect connection of both the (quite legitimate) claim to objective knowledge and subjective opinion of neutral facts and personal value judgments are impermissible mixed. Finally, the word implies "generally" a majority. Truth, which alone is what the science has nothing to do with the majority. It is neither "social" or "democratic": If someone finds out a million, that the fourth root is from 81 is 3, then it stays that will be accurate, correct and true, if the rest do 999 999 do not, do not understand or even deny. The same applies to herbal remedies for illness in people.
The arrogant, ignorant and at the same narrow-minded sole representative and general validity claim of the school "medicine" is nothing but a silly dogma ("dogmas and reliance on dogmas are significant sign of stupidity!" [Rupert LAY5)]) and - what irony - from here really, really scientific reasons to reject and be rejected.
They contend that the arrogant, autocratic school "doctors" written in the album:
"There is nothing more foolish than to laugh at something that we understand nothing."
(Rudolf Virchow6) to Carl Ludwig Schleich7))
"Who does not know the truth, is just a fool. Who knows but nevertheless denies and is a criminal. "(Bertolt Brecht8))
1) Prof. Dr. Paracelsus (Philippus Theophrastus von Hohenheim Aureolus Bombastus [1493-1541]), physician, alchemist, astrologer, mystic, theologian and philosopher, was one of the most learned men of his time. He attacked the doctrine of signatures on again, and continued to develop the Spagyric prepared homeopathy.
2) Immanuel Kant (1724 - 1804), founder of German idealism, and representatives of the critical idealism of the Enlightenment, was the most important thinkers of the West since Plato, the greatest German philosopher. Main works: "Critique of Pure Reason" (1781), "Critique of Practical Reason" (1788), "Critique of Judgement" (1790).
3) Hippocrates (c. 460 - 370 BC), the most famous physician of antiquity, is regarded as the founder of founded on experience and empirical observation of natural medicine / healing of the West. The "Hippocratic Oath" - a moral constitution of the medical profession - going back to him.
4) Prof. Dr. Karl-Heinz Hackethal Julius (1921 - 1997), orthopedist, surgeon and author, was supporter of euthanasia and vehement critic of the school "medicine".
5) Prof. Dr. mult. Dr. hc mult. Rupert Lay (* 14th 06th 1929), philosopher, theologian, psychologist, psycho-therapist, a theoretical physicist, former director of the Jesuit College of St. Georgen in Frankfurt am Main, the author of over 40 books, founder of the ethics of biophilia ( literally, love of life [over]), is one of the most learned men of the present.
6) Prof. Dr. Rudolf Ludwig Karl Virchow (1821 - 1902), hygienists, pathologists, researchers and politicians, was a doctor at the Berlin Charité. He described and named the Leukemia and founded modern pathology.
7) Prof. Dr. Carl Ludwig Schleich (1859 - 1922), Famulus (students and staff) was Virchow, gynecologist, surgeon and writer. Today's local anesthesia is based on the methodology developed by him infiltration anesthesia.
8) Eugen Berthold Friedrich Brecht (1898 - 1956), scientists, physicians, paramedics, playwright, director, writer and editor, was one of the greatest writers of modern times.
No comments:
Post a Comment