Many question their MD's lab test results virtually always at the diagnosis of a disease condition and there's much controversy surrounding their limited tests which are usually on blood and this connective tissue is indeed very limited as to what it can test. Many also cricitize the medical establishment with their singular focus on disease rather than true wellness and prevention, but what are the details you need to know?
Well-meaning Doctors in this country (USA) order more than 4 billion tests each year, mainly for diseases rather than wellness and prevention. Unlike veterinarians who analyze show animals' cells and bodily functions to prevent and treat illnesses naturally, people seldom go to doctors for such thorough analysis and this is mainly because doctors are virtually not trained in medical cellular nutrition. Yet, medical tests have become more advanced and easier to do due to technology, helping doctors understand their patients' conditions better. However, recent studies show that many physicians misinterpret test results or overestimate their accuracy. Doctors sometimes find it hard to understand false positives, which can result in crucial medical decisions made on wrong assumptions about patients' illnesses.
Doctors and patients frequently face a shared challenge - a lack of comprehension regarding probability. To illustrate, let's consider Disease X, which affects 1 in 1,000 individuals, and the test for it has a 5 percent false-positive rate. What are the chances that a patient who tests positive truly has the disease and why wasn't it stopped in its tracks with medical nutrition intervention?
"The missing link in medical practice today is medical nutrition. And the body medicus, corpus medicus is lacking even the wherewithal ideologically to look in the right places for answers that make a tremendous difference in the outcome, both for prevention and for- I wouldn't say cure- but for remediation for treatment." -- Dr. Richard Kunin, MD is a medical doctor who focuses on nutrition and specializes in Orthomolecular medicine. He has more than forty years of experience in this field. He was one of the first to use vitamins and minerals in medical treatment and helped establish the Orthomolecular Medical Society with Dr. Linus Pauling in 1976.
In a study done in 2014 (Medicine’s Uncomfortable Relationship With Math Calculating Positive Predictive Value), researchers found that almost half of the doctors surveyed thought that patients who tested positive had a 95 percent chance of having Disease X. However, this belief is completely wrong and far from accurate. Let's imagine a group of 1,000 people, all with an equal chance of having Disease X. Out of these 1,000 individuals, we already know that only one person actually has the disease. However, due to a 5 percent false-positive rate, 50 out of the remaining 999 people would still test positive for the disease. This means that there would be a total of 51 people with positive test results, but only one of them would actually be sick. So, if your test comes back positive, your actual chance of having the disease is 1 out of 51, which is equal to 2 percent. This is much lower than the initial belief of 95 percent.
Did You Know? We Have Free Email News & Tips
Sign up to the above email list to receive more free updates.
Waiting for illness or trying to prevent it and ir diagnosed to reverse illness without side effects of drugs and surgeries? Which is better?
Receiving an inaccurate diagnosis from especially a false positive can have serious consequences, potentially leading to unnecessary medical interventions like amputation or chemotherapy. However, the emotional impact of a mistaken result is often the most devastating and enduring. Everyday Health reports that individuals who receive a wrong diagnosis may experience anxiety and emotional distress similar to those actually afflicted with the disease or condition they were wrongly diagnosed with, even after learning the truth. The psychological toll begins the moment the incorrect result is disclosed, even if medical errors are caught before any irreversible procedures are performed.
Research shows that doctors can make mistakes with various tests, such as those for prostate and lung cancer, heart attack, asthma, and Lyme disease. No test is flawless, and even the most careful doctors can still make errors and this is compounded by the fact that the Western medical model still fails to adopt the concept of medical cellular nutrition which encompasses a much broader preventive approach primarily by analyzing the cellular, organ function and lifestyle risk.
Many of the coworkers of an article by an author (Dr. Daniel Morgan's "What the tests don’t show Doctors are surprisingly bad at reading lab results. It’s putting us all at risk.") regarding lab testing fail to grasp the fact that a significant number of the tests they rely on are highly unreliable. In a study by Dr. Daniel Morgan conducted last year (in 2017) alongside several colleagues, they examined the treatment of 177 patients who were admitted to hospitals with various ailments, ranging from fractures to severe abdominal pain.
Their goal was to determine the necessity of the tests they underwent, based on the latest medical guidelines. Shockingly, they discovered that almost 90 percent of the patients underwent at least one unnecessary test, and in total, nearly one-third of all the tests conducted were completely unnecessary. They didn't go into extreme detail as to what those tests were but you can bet they weren't in-depth cellular nutritional medical tests along with more systems biology-oriented ones that would delve into why dis-eases are occuring. When patients are subjected to unnecessary tests, there is a reasonable chance that doctors are basing their treatment decisions on the results.
However, by definition, these decisions are more likely to be flawed and pose a higher risk to the patients. Again, wouldn't it be much easier to significantly lessen the chances of illness of any kind including chronic and acute? We have to remember most Medical doctors at least in the Western world join this profession without knowing the harsh realities of underfunded, outdated, lack of preventive and disease reversal focus in a highly dysfunctional medical system. Many join not realizing medical schools in general mainly on prepare them and nurses along with the industry for managing disease.
Please donate to the "Pay It Forward" Campaign
This donation will help others obtain individualized help who can't afford it.
Tailoring cellular nutritional recommendations to each person's unique biochemistry, metabolism, epi-genetics, and microbiota is the goal of personalized nutrition. This approach acknowledges that individuals react differently to environmental influences including: cellular nutritional intake, dietary patterns, optimal vs "recommended daily intakes" as well as man others. Terms like "precision nutrition, nutrigenetics, nutrigenomics, stratified nutrition, orthomolecular nutrition" are often used interchangeably, but they do have subtle differences in their methodologies. Orthomolecular cellular nutrition offers personalized suggestions based on genetics, epigenetics, food preferences, microbiota, metabolome, physical activity, and lifestyle, considering how nutrients interact with biological processes to produce individualized responses.
Achieving the near-perfect mix of nutrients can lower the risk of various diseases such as arthritis, depression, headaches, skin issues, autism, hypertension, and diabetes. Basic plant biology and botany shows us that that maintaining a specific balance of molecules at the cellular level can boost a plant's -- as well as the human body's ability to ward off illnesses. Orthomolecular nutrition aims to serve as a preventive and healing treatment based on the concept of adopting the "terrain model" of biology rather than only the "germ theory" that the Western medical model uses which focuses almost exclusively on treating label diseases rather than preventing and reversing them using body-native substances.
