Benelles versus conventional medicine

gene

One thing that benelles and conventional medicine have in common is the idea that having the right genes turned on—or off—at the right times is what leads to health. But that base is about all the two have in common.

A benelles approach is hands-off. The idea is that genes are going to activate and deactivate correctly on their own. A benelles “prescription” is to avoid mutagens, like chemicals and radiation, and to provide a supportive environment for genes with exercise, diet, meditation, etc.

Conversely, conventional medicine is hands-on. The idea is that genes will never behave correctly without the providence of multinational corporations. The prescription is a swathe of mutagens, like MRIs and synthetic drugs, designed to Frankenstein organic matter.

Very simply, the benelles approach to disease is to help organic matter naturally create antibodies by increasing sleep, physical activity, organic foods, etc. On the other hand, the conventional medicine approach is to do everything possible to prevent your body from creating antibodies, such as bombardment by never-tested pharma cocktails chock-full of negative side effects—aka indicators of decreased health, gene damage, and a lesser long-term ability to produce life-saving antibodies.

Let’s take the interesting example of the TP53 gene to highlight the difference in approach. The TP53 gene expresses p53 protein, our natural anticancer protein.

Shockingly, over 50% of human tumors come from a mutation of the TP53 gene (Hollstein et al 1991). Mutagens cause mutations, and mutagens are: chemicals, radiation, or viruses. This means a vast amount of cancer is being caused by chemicals and radiation.

How would benelles’ and conventional medicine’s approach differ in regard to p53 and cancer? First, conventional medicine specialists would deny that their chemicals and radiation could have caused mutations leading to cancer. Also, pharma would seek to create synthetic p53, an anticancer pill. But this predictable Frankenstein approach is blocked by nature, as synthetic p53 causes premature aging (Tyner et al 2001).

On the other hand, native p53 restoration (that produced by the gene) has been shown to treat cancer without damaging benelles in the process (i.e. no side effects). Which means, of course, pharma is looking for a means of pharmacological reactivation of p53. We say, the best way to get your body to do what it’s biologically supposed to do is: halt synthetic chemicals; add sunlight, fresh air, walking, organic foods, and natural spices.

Plus, we’re not just talking cancer here. Research is showing that autoimmune disease, like lupus and arthritis, seems to be caused by mutations to gene signatures in T-cells brought on by synthetic drugs like corticosteroids, which you may know as prednisone and prednisone-derivatives (Singh et al 2012). And this line of research especially makes common sense when you consider a primary cause of Cushing’s syndrome is taking glucocorticoid drugs—such as prednisone and its ilk. Surprise, surprise: all those pharmacological side effects you were feeling really were damaging your genes all along!

The fundamental disconnect: in less than 100 years, we’ve stopped being physically active, we’ve stopped getting sunlight, and we’ve put ourselves on all-chemical diets. Is it any wonder our p53 gene is getting damaged and can’t figure out how to stop cancer and autoimmune disease? Not really; but it is a wonder that the only brand of medicine which is government-approved has but a single solution which goes against common sense: see a licensed doctor and fix your health with more synthetic chemicals.

Leave a Reply